All right, >> turn this on. All right. Good afternoon. My name is Don Wyn. I'm a Florida bar license attorney specially appointed by the city of Titusville to serve as the magistrate for today's quote code enforcement hearings. These public hearings are quasi judicial in nature.
While formal rules of evidence do not apply, fundamental due process will be observed. Everyone with the case today will have the opportunity to present testimony. You may also present evidence or call witnesses to testify on your behalf. Please note there is no public comment portion during code enforcement
hearings. To speak on a spec specific case, you must either be the respondent or a witness called to testify. Everything said today will be recorded. All testimony will be given under oath. When you are sworn in, please state your name and provide your current mailing address so we have an updated record for
sending any orders. Uh the city will present its case first. Information may be displayed on the screens and documents may be provided by the city as evidence. The city's PowerPoint presentation will be also be entered into evidence unless there are objections. After all evidence and
testimony have been presented, I will make a ruling. My ruling will be reduced to writing and mailed to you. At this time, I will swear in all witnesses. If you intend to testify for your case, please stand and raise your right hand. Do you swear or affirm that the
testimony you're about to give is the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth? >> Thank you. You may be seated. Um, so we are going ahead to the hearings portion of the agenda. We're not doing minutes anymore, right? That's that was
one of the changes. [laughter] All right. Um, and they're not Massie hearings anymore. They're non-compliant hearings. All right. Big changes. All right. So, we'll start with 25-74 at 218 Ojiway Avenue. Officer.
>> All right. I have I'm presenting this case on behalf of code officer Flanigan. He is out today. So, I have two items to submit to exhibits. The first one is the notice of
hearing and affidavit for today's hearing. And the second is the cost recovery statement in the amount of $189.11. So once again, this is the non-compliance hearing for case number 25-74.
The respondents, Shirley Bethune and uh Jacqueline Adson, Sunwest Mortgage Companies Incorporated. The violation address is 2198 Ojiway Avenue here in Titusville, Florida.
Uh we have two mailing addresses, 218 Ojiway Avenue, Titusville, Florida, and 18303 Gidley Road, uh Sarastos, uh California 9073. We have two active violations. The first
one is section 6-109, subsection 302.7 for accessory structure fence and 304.2 to enclosure swimming pool. So, Sunwest Mortgage was sent notice of
non-compliance hearing on December 10th, 2025 by certified and first class mail. The certified mail was signed for on December 15, 2025. Linda Sanchez with Sunwest Mortgage has been an email contact and is aware of
the violation. She advised they're still working on eviction um of the current tenants. So this case was originally heard on November 10, 2025. The respondent Shirley Bethum and Sunwest Mortgage
Company did not appear at the meeting. The respondent was found in violation of section 302.7 and 304.2 two and the respondent was ordered to correct the violation on or before December 5th, 2025
and a fine of $100 per day per violation to start on December 6th to be imposed until the violation was corrected and administrative costs in the amount of $189.11 were imposed.
So, as of this morning, I did do a follow-up inspection prior to the hearing, and the following photo is uh represents what I observed this morning. The fence is still uh unfixed, and the
pool is um exposed. So, I do believe there is a representative here to speak. I'm not sure on behalf of whom. >> Hello. Uh, I'm Robert Mims. I'm here in on behalf of Sunwest Mortgage Company, the current owner of the property
following the foreclosure. For the court's awareness, the bank has been has made repeated good faith efforts to resolve this matter without unnecessary court involvement. On December 21st of 2025, I personally made contact with the tenants, Shirley Bthun. At that time,
Mrs. Bthun expressly agreed to two things. First, to allow the bank's vendor to access the property to address the exterior code enforcement violations. And secondly, to enter into a cash for keys agreement whereby she would voluntarily vacate the property on
or before January 10th, 2026. I did bring that agreement with me if you want me to bring it up. That agreement was reduced to writing and signed. I am pre present today with both the signed agreement and the bank's $4,500 cash for keys check which was
prepared to uh to give to Mrs. Bthoon's uh upon our vacancy. Unfortunately, despite that agreement, Mrs. Bthoom advised last week that she would not be vacating the property and that the bank and its contractors are not permitted to
enter the property to complete the repairs. Since that communication, she has become unresponsive. Given these circumstances, the bank intends to proceed with the eviction to obtain lawful possession of the property. If the city elects to move forward with
completing the necessary repairs to bring the property into compliance prior to possession being obtained, the bank does not object and understands that such action would involve associated fees and costs. Once possession is secured through the eviction process,
the bank will immediately address all outstanding code issues and ensue the property is properly maintained and brought to compliance. >> Uh Mr. Mr. Mims, what is your position with uh what's your relation to Sunwest? >> Real estate broker. >> You're the broker like the REO? >> Yes, sir.
>> Okay. >> But you don't actually work for >> um so I remember when this hearing happened in November, there were issues because of title um at the time because
the foreclosure was going through and so there's a technicality now. Um, we don't have the actual owner uh having received any mailings, any notices here cuz right now we have it
directed to Shirley Bthoon, Jock Eden, and Sunwest Mortgage Company. Sunwest Mortgage Company is not the entity that took title. >> If you recall, we moved it out one month because we did not have good service. We had since have good service. Well, the the only issue is that the actual entity
that now owns the property is Pink Trust as trustee of Sunwest Property Investments LLC, which technically is a different entity than Sunwest Mortgage Company. So, and then if you go on the property appraisers website, Pink Trust has a
different mailing address, which I don't show that we have sent the mail to. >> I believe it's a Puerto Rican address. >> You're you are correct, sir. So, I think we I don't think I can issue an order because I think notice would technically fail. Dave, I mean, I don't it's it's a
really weird thing because Sun West was the the bank. They did foreclose, but at the foreclosure, they assigned their bid to affiliated trust. So technically now title is under Pink Trust as trustee for Sunwest uh uh Sunwest
Property Investments which obviously separate entity than Sunwest Mortgage Company which we have. >> Um I would tend to agree with most of that with the caveat. Um I think you know what it would be whoever was the record owner pursuant to either the
property appraisers website or tax collector's website at the time of notice. um right or not the underlying title changed or not that would constitute pursuant to the statute >> the uh uh title change hands October 9th so prior to I think at least this last
round of notices going out so I think we need to rectify that before any action can take be taken um because I don't want to create another appealable [laughter] order um but that is that's not to say that you guys aren't still taking the same
steps you need to do to remove this person anyway I just don't think that we as a city can impose any fines until the actual owner is given uh notice. I don't think we need to start all over, but uh because when they took title, they're they take it subject to it's buyer beware, right? So there's they take it
subject to the violations that were existing at the time. So I don't think we need to start over. It's just the notice of this hearing and everything needs to be directed to the correct and proper party. Um for you guys, Mr. Mims, what is your timeline you think for them
to I mean I don't know if you can speak to that but >> yes sir >> if they were to file an eviction action that would happen. >> They actually filed or began the notice in I think it was on November 7th. Don't quote me exactly on the date but beginning of November and then I got the cash for keys agreement and I mean I've
got the check in her name and everything but uh she just couldn't find a place. She's saying now February. Um but we're trying to get her out there out of there as quickly as possible. I don't see I don't see any legal action that's actually been filed, but maybe they sent the 3-day notice and everything to her. >> Yes, sir.
>> Um, >> now the attorney I haven't spoke with who's actually doing the file there out of Ohio or something, and I did see a 90-day notice and a 20-day notice, but I'm not sure >> where it's at with the courts. Give me a second.
Okay. So, did we was it the December that we table the action until this month? Right. >> That's correct. >> Okay. Because the title issues didn't show up. All right. Um I think we need
to rectify it. So David, if you do you want do you need me to send you the certificate of title or do you want to pull that up on your on your own? >> Pull that up right here. >> Huh? >> We can pull that up. >> Okay. Yeah. We just need to make sure the correct addresses make sure that any notices go there um and give this pink
trust the opportunity uh to appear and everything at a subsequent hearing. So let's get that remedied. I mean that probably gives you time. If she's saying she'll move out in February, maybe we don't need to. Yes. >> Um but I don't think I can impose any fines here today on this on this one. Okay.
>> And I'll diligently try to get access with the vendors. We've got the vendors set up. They're ready to roll. It's just I don't want him getting shot. >> And you're in regular contact with not it would be officer Flanigan, right? >> Have you been in contact with officer Flanigan? >> No, sir. >> Can you give him Officer Flanigan's
contact information? Any updates? Make sure that he gets it. And uh hopefully this doesn't need to come back up again because just the timing on and everything is just a little bit complicated, a little bit weird. So >> for once I'm getting paid by the hours. [laughter] >> Great. All right. Thank you.
>> Thank you. >> All right. All right. All right. Uh we'll move on to Oh, you guys take your time. Uh let's see. Thank you.
All right, let's move on to 25-89 Cube Strip at 5155 South Washington Avenue. I have two items to submit. The first is the affidavit and notice of hearing for today's uh hearing and the cost recovery statement in the amount of
$136.28. So once again, this is the non-compliance hearing for case number 25-89. The respondent, CC Cub Strip LLC, and Twan Lee is the registered agent. Our violation address is 5155 South
Washington Avenue, Titusville, Florida. We have two mailing addresses, 3306 South Hopkins Avenue and 5175 South Washington Avenue, both in Titusville. We have one violation that is section
6-56 per uh construction permits required and this is a repeat violation case. So certified and first class mail was sent on December 15th, 2025. Certified mail sent to the registered agent was
returned unclaimed on the 19th of December and the certified mail sent to the LLC was signed for on December 29th. Copies were posted at city hall and on the property where the violation existed on December 30th.
So this case was originally heard December 8, 2025. The representatives for the respondent were not present. The respondent was found in repeat violation of 6-56 in order to correct the cited violation [snorts]
uh by obtaining the required building permits for the work performed in units 108 and 109 and the signage installed not later than noon on January 9, 2026. Compliance was not achieved. A fin in the amount of $500 per day per violation
commencing on January 10th, 2026 and continuing daily till the violations are corrected. The administrative costs in the amount of $13628 were imposed. So, as of Friday, when I checked the
building department software, there had been no applications submitted, but our registered agent, Tuan Lee, is here today to provide testimony. >> He was not. >> Yes, I was about to say. All right. Uh, give me one sec.
>> Can you go ahead and state your name and your uh mailing address for the record? Uh, my name mail and address is 5175 South Washington Avenue. >> Go ahead. I'm sorry. Go ahead and raise your right hand. Do you swear or affirm that the testimony you're about to give is the truth, the whole truth, and
nothing but the truth? >> Yes. >> All right. You can go ahead. Okay. So, the property is mine and the business is open um for the spots that's um um
required for permit is mine, too. So, I'm the business owner and a property owner. Now, here's the thing. We used to decide decide to take three units to put in one for the nail shop. And when we
start to look it up, clean it up um do some basis renovation and then we find out the two unit is used to connect after we um investigate. So if you go back in the
history of the property, those two units is has been um um connect and I'm I just I just bought a few year back. So original I was thinking about put three units together but and then I find out the units is used to be connect and the
previous owner they put some kind of very simple wall on top of it so they can rent it out whatever. So I decide to not use three units. I use a two unit. That's why the other units is never been touched because it's not connected. So when I look at it, it's like it's it's
used to be connect together. So that's what make me thinking like so I don't actually do any major construction and based on the floor that I'm allowed to do anything under $5,000 which is just remove um the position. So that's why I
say okay I'm on the business. I'm not business owner. So when to remove that that doesn't make sense for something is already exit. If you go back investigate whatever you want to look that two units used to be together. So that's why I did
not I don't think is permit is required as a business owner and the property owner and it's already exist before. So that's all I want to say. But if right now the city have forced me to pull permit I'm I'm okay with that. I'm going
to pull puppet but I just want to let you know that is that I did not create that pad is already exit. So when I look at it but if you want I can go and that's why I didn't do
anything until now. I just want to be here to clarify that it's existed and they can go back and look. Officer, did you want to speak as to the ordinance and everything all the requirements are for the construction permits?
>> Yes. So, previously in unit 108, there was a hair salon. Uh BTR was issued to unit 108. Off the top of my head, I don't remember the specific name of the nail salon. It was only one unit. All fire
inspections that were completed as a part of that BTR was just for that single unit. There was no connection to unit 109. So any work that happened after the
hair salon moved out, that would be new work. And as per 6-56, that would require a permit. >> Yeah, I'm I'm bringing up 656 right now. so I can reference it directly. Um
656. So Mr. Lei, regardless of whether or not you own the units, the adjacent units, when you're talking about two separate partition units and a wall in between them, there's certain obviously code restrictions and code violations or or I'm sorry, code ordinances that govern
what you can and can't do. like there's going to be a certain requirements as far as like firewall and everything like that. So regardless of whether or not they were uh that wall was opened up before is sort of irrelevant because if the permit had been issued at that time
and someone had partitioned them completely um and that had been inspected and closed out. If you're going to tear down that wall again, then that's going to require new construction permit again. So, you know, I I get what you're saying. you own the property and everything like that, but there are
still city requirements just to ensure safety and to make sure that there's an inspection done and that there's no issues with it. [snorts] So, what they're saying is that this is the type of work that requires a construction permit and there were notices previous.
This is the we had a hearing on this in December and notices for that would have gone to you in October or November, right? So this shouldn't have been the first time that you heard about it, right? Did you get the prior notices? >> I get it from December. And when I was
here that it's it's closed. So I was here on December whatever 10 or something like that at 11:00 in the morning. That's what I received a note and it was here. >> Mhm. >> And it's not open. So I do something else here. >> Um that's I mean I was here to obey
anyway. So I don't want to I don't want to argue. I don't want to fight. I because of all this stuff going on, I own a construction business. So if you want me to pull a permit, give me some time. I pull a permit because I don't I don't want to continue to get into stuff like this and then I I start to own a construction business, >> right?
>> Then if you want me to pull permit, I'm not argue, but I just want to let you know that >> I'm I'm own the building when the building is collap. The building >> is what? >> Before I own the building, the building was >> vacant. >> Mhm.
>> Not working, broken. So I try to fix the whole thing up now because of all the stuff that the city don't not happy about me. I start to own a construction business. So if you want me to pull a business, I'm I own construction business. I own the architecture company too. So now whatever you want me to do,
I will do it. I don't I'm not going to fire or argue, but but I have to get more time to do that. I don't I didn't do anything last time because I have I want to let you know that before I own it, there's something going on to the building already. Now the no one who suck it up is okay.
>> Did you other than coming here did you try contacting the the the officer? Is it you officer right or is it planned again on this one? >> This is my case. >> Did you have any previous communications with Mr. Lei? Did he leave you voicemail, email, anything like that? >> No sir.
>> Okay. Um that's is not true. Like a month or two ago I had uh call Megan and I text her. I I believe it's on still in a text. I have day and time stamp on it. Uh or I call I don't remember, but I
did. Okay. Well, right now this the purpose of this hearing um is solely whether or not the violation still exists. So, we had the hearing in December 9th, I believe it was. And so, you had until January 9th
to get the permit obtained. Now, I would be uh uh uh I would be open to granting leniency uh if there were at least a permit already applied for and we was just in process. Uh but it doesn't sound like
any actions have been taken. So, at this point, it's simply a black and white calculation for me. The violation was issued December. You had 30 days to comply. At this point, there is no compliance. So, we just have to move forward. What I would tell to you is obviously make sure that before you
leave here today, I don't know where the construction permit uh office is. Which room is it? >> Uh just outside the door to the left. >> I mean, I would obviously suggest you make sure you get the requisite paperwork that you need from them before you leave here today. Sounds like you're
in the business, so you know exactly what you need to do to get a permits and everything like that. And it should just simply be a formality. That way, they can send out an inspector, make sure everything's done properly. All right. So, I I just um start to own the construction business. So, um I'm going to um put a permit and but then and it's
extra time and I I'm going to get a paper work right now. So, I'm going to try to put it in in in a day or two because I have to get a basic drawing going because I cannot let just just put on the paper and without a basic drawing or structure of what I'm going to um
what exit and what is going be. So technically it's at the exit of what is has been before and what is going to be is very similar too. But I have to do it like what I say somebody owned the property before me and they they have a lockup going on that building. I don't
blame it on Megan and some other people who ever been here all more than 10 years they should know that property had gone on a lot. So I I did not it's >> no I I I understand but what is that how is that relevant to your not getting a permit prior to this point
>> because at first like what I say I what I say is I was thinking about like get a permit to pull all three unit together because the nail shop need more than bigger than that but after I investigate and find out this like is open space before I I own the property so that's why I say so I just remove it but
thinking like it's not construction major of just remove it Because so yes the nail shop was there before with two different unit but that when put in before they on it so the history of that if you go back like prior to more a
couple minute business before that is has connect but the nail shop was there and I when I bought the property I don't even know that so when I buy property I thought it like two unit but and then when I start to put them all together
and I find out oh this that's knock. So that's why I stopped the uh put the other the third unit together. So now it's small instead of like and but I I understand it sounds like a misunderstanding but again it's not >> nothing against you. It's nothing
personal but I know when officer Wright presented the case last month. She showed many pictures from months before. That means officers have actually been inside the unit. They've seen it. I'm imagine the officers don't walk in
unannounced and don't tell who they are. What I'm saying is there's been many opportunities since you found out to have submitted for an application for a permit. That's where I'm missing the disconnect. So you say you tried to come here in December, but there have been notices before then.
Someone When When was the pictures taken? When was the initial inspection done, Miss Miss Officer? Right. Sorry. >> So the initial inspection was done on November 4th. >> Okay. Um, and I posted the notice of repeat violation on uh unit 203, which
is 5175 South Washington uh November 5th, that very next morning. He is correct that I attempted to contact him on November 4th. I have the phone call. Um, he texted, "Can I call you later?" I said, "Yes." And there was
no follow-up phone call from that. I've had no contact from him since that November 4th phone call and text message exchange, but the notice of repeat violator was posted outside the unit
203. That notice was removed when I came to post for the December meeting. And that could have been anyone that works for him, not necessarily him, but but again to be fair, um there I just feel like there's been multiple opportunities
to have taken some steps to rectify it. I understand at the beginning perhaps it was a misunderstanding and you felt that because the wall was not there before or the opening or the two units were connected before it wouldn't be a big deal and a permit wouldn't be required.
But because all these notices have happened, the inspections have happened, this prior hearing has happened, and now here we are today, you know, I'm less sympathetic to giving additional time because then all that would mean is then
we'd have to come back in 30 days and do this again. So, I'm going to move forward with the finding today because my only charge here today is whether or not it is still in violation based on the findings from last December. And
that finding was that there was no permit at the time. >> Here we are 30 days later. There's still not a permit and not a permit applied for. So, yes. >> So, like what I say because of all the stuff going on, that's why I started on a construction business. So, I just
start. So now I'm asking not a month, no not a long time. I'm asking seven business day to get everything in place. So I'm going to put a permit but I need I cannot like walk over there and fill it out. It doesn't work that way. They ask me they going to ask me the drawing. They going to ask me like as at least
some basic measurement. So all I'm asking right now is a seven days. No more than that. So you will see the permit going on. Megan will oversee that if if that happen. >> It's May officer May. Officer May, right? >> Sorry. Sorry. Me. Um, so I'm all I'm
asking right now is time for me to implement it because I was here. I called her. I I text her on November 4. So I'm trying to get in contact. Somehow it's not connected, disconnect. I cannot remember. Now in December, I was here and the doors closed. I was here on time
too. I'm sorry. Five minutes after, but I was here. So I I try to follow up to give the message of what's going on before I put a permit and stuff like that. It if it not necessary and while I've been been waiting for and say forget it I'm going on the construction
business now I can it's easier for me to move it forward any other investment that I'm going to do. That's why and that that's why I want I'm asking three I mean sorry seven business day not a whole month to get the drawing in place and to get a to pull a permit because
even now I'm walk out there I cannot put a permit in without a drawing without a number >> and again I understand that point but you have two months to get to here but I'm not I'll I'll do this for you. How long if you were to pull the permit, submit application
is complete, how long would it take for a permit to be issued? >> I would be unable to do that depending on their current status of permits that would already be ahead of that >> for review could be anywhere from two two weeks to a month and depending on
what all was provided in that first submitt. >> [sighs] >> Is the city willing to give Mr. delay additional time or I'm inclined to go ahead and and and and say that it's still in violation proceed
with the Massie I'm sorry the finding that it's not compliant but give additional days before the fines start to acrue because you guys are asking for a higher amount. >> We we would be in favor of that. All right, I'm going to say this. I'm
going to I'm going to give you 10 business days. So, I'm going to find it non-compliant today. Within 10 business days, if you don't have the permit uh completed, not the application, have got the permit, then the fines will
start acrewing. Okay. I'm sorry like the applica the fully permit in 10 business day or the application because I can put application in a few days. I'm at 7 days because I want to get more room for me just in case. >> Well, the issue is that let's say let's
say I was doing an order today that says that you have to get an application submitted within 7 days. You can just submit any crappy application that will never pass muster and then now we're back here 30 days later. I wanted something more definitive than just the application submitted
so we can do something where I that's why I'm asking what's a fair estimate. I don't really know what the timeline is and I know that's probably an unfair question to ask you guys as well. I just don't want to give it you know that's why I said and he asked for 7 days that's why I said well we'll do two weeks instead. I don't know if
that's viable or not. I think two weeks would be appropriate and if there's anything beyond that, we could contact you. >> Okay. So, what I'm going to say to you is I'm going to give that 10 business days to get the permit issued. I know that's
very tight, but I need you to, you know, act very efficiently and very quickly from here to get it done. Now, we get to the point that you're running out of time, you know, contact officer, right? Uh, you know, try to figure it out. If
there is a scenario where you're making all reasonable efforts and it's just a timing thing and we the city believes that, I think there will be an avenue then to either wave or withdraw some fines. Okay? But I want to put something in there now to make sure that we continue on the timeline and we're
moving forward. Okay? >> So, let me tell let me give you this. I'm going to put a permit in with a GC everything drawn simple drawn because that's not a major construction. I'm going to put them in with a GC everything within 10 days, 7 days,
whatever. In the meanwhile, we're going to have a real architecture in case if something doesn't work out, we will put a full architecture design in it because I don't mind to comply all that stuff, but it have to be fairly. And then now what you sell to me is fairly. So, I'm
going to do that. I'm not going to waste my time and then come back here next month and say it's not done. So I'm work two resolution at the same time. One is I'm put a permit in with a simple drawn in case the building department say no I have a architecture then I will throw in
the architecture which is mean is showing to you that I'm doing a work not just do a crappy stuff to buy the time but however if the city is slowing down for any reason and they they take longer that's not me I'm trying to do two
scenario to show you I'm trying to get it done but the city has so much work and they be high is not my fault. So I cannot bind for that. I don't mind to to do a a step further than just a permit. Officer Glenn, you have a
>> actually once the application if it is complete and it's presented to permitting it. It's a pretty fast process for those initial reviews. >> Okay. >> Whatever you feel is appropriate for you to take. Mr. Lelay, I'm not here to give
you advice. again, we're already we're giving you the alternative is for me to have the fine start acrewing tomorrow. So, we're going to give you the 10 business days. The city seems fine with that. Um, and then whatever it is you feel is the appropriate step you need to
do. You you take that step. Okay? If it's how you describe, that's fine. I'm not going to tell you how to run your business. It just needs to have a permit applied for and issued. Okay? >> Okay. Well, I just want to let you know ahead of time. I'm taking serious to to put a permit in. I'm not like just just
put a a scrappy whatever. So, I just want to get this done. It's over. I don't have to do it. That's why I'm put >> a lock of an investment to start construction because I don't want to deal with all this stuff. Understood? All right. All right. I find based on the evidence and testimony presented that notice was properly provided to respondent and respondent did appear.
The evidence demonstrates that the property located at 5155 South Washington Avenue, Titusville, Florida, remains in violation. Specifically, a construction permit has not uh been uh pulled and the property is not in
compliance with the previous order dated December 9th, 2025. Uh therefore, I find that the city has established a continuing violation of section 6-56. Um, [snorts] accordingly, a fine of $500
a day is imposed commencing on we will make it commencing on Tuesday, January 27th, and continuing daily until the violations are corrected. Additionally,
the cost of $13628 um have not been paid and will be included as part of the order. A certified copy of this order will be recorded in the public records constituting a lean on the subject property. The respondent is required to notify code enforcement once the
property is brought into compliance so that code enforcement can verify and confirm. What I would say to you is to make sure you let her know when the application is in and then they can monitor it on their side. Okay. >> Okay. Thank you. >> Thank you. All right.
All right, we will move on to the initial hearings uh portion and uh first one we have is 26-01 uh Sherik at 306 South Singleton Avenue.
>> Good afternoon, Magn. Uh, first off, I'd like to enter in enter in exhibits a uh notice of hearing, the notice of violation, and there should be a cost recovery in here somewhere. There it is in the back. Cost recovery
statement of $1566. Thank you. Okay. Okay. That being said, this property is in full compliance as of this morning >> at 9:30. >> Wonderful. Uh the only thing that the city would would no no daily fine. We
would like a find in the fact and the uh fees impo the cost of the recovery cost imposed. >> Okay. >> And the property owner is here. >> Okay. >> Do you want to speak to anything or Huh?
>> Okay. Yes. >> And she needs to be sworn. >> Yes. Yes. Go ahead and raise your right hand. Do you swear or affirm that the testimony you're about to give is the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth? >> Yes, it is. >> All right, great. Go ahead and state your name and your mailing address for the record.
>> My name is Patricia Sherik. My mailing address is 1635 Hanks Avenue, Orlando, Florida, 32814. >> Okay. Do you want to add anything or
>> I do I wanted to make a statement if you would accept that please. Um so coming here today planning to come here today I did not know that uh we'd be able to dismiss the violation this morning. So
um I had prepared some documents which a lot of them are unnecessary and mute points at this stage. But I do want to tell you uh that I fully agree with the code enforcement's assessment of the
property and the violations that occurred there and that I am fully as the owner responsible and I take that responsibility very seriously. So I wanted to provide you just a little bit of background because I think it's
relevant. I um it's not in any way to relieve any obligation I have on the property at all. So I will tell you that I grew up in Titusville. Actually my family moved here in the 50s and um so I married and
I purchased my first home in Tyville in 1976. I have owned a total of four homes over the last 50 years in this town. And so, um, three of those homes I was in
complete control of and I they were I cared for them. I with pride they enhanced the neighborhoods that they were in. The home, the fourth home is a home, the home at Singleton Avenue, and I bought that to provide shelter for my
son who would otherwise have faced homelessness. So, I want to tell you just a little bit about my son. And Officer Lewis can attest to the fact that he is extremely bright and um but he has functioning
skills. He was born with significant deficits that impact his executive functions. He has a genetic disorder. All this I have documentation to substantiate. So uh it is well
established since childhood but it impacts his physical health and I think officer Lewis has seen his health up and down and it impacts his sustainable exertion. The issues underlly every
aspect of his life and how he maintains his his own health, his own wherewithal, his home and everything. And so he's vulnerable
and um so I would just tell you that before I talk about this incident that there have been other issues and that I have worked with Frank for so in no way is this an excuse. But on the
early hours of October 27th we had a record rainfall of 13 inches. And so behind 306 South Singleton is wetlands. Those wetlands flooded up into the storage area behind the house, flooded
the backyard that was full of his belongings, and it flooded the basement. And so at 7:00 in the morning, I had an urgent call from him asking me to please help. By 8:15 that morning, I had
secured a dumpster from Herring Dumpster. And so in his he's not organized, far from it. But uh in him remedying the situation, he took a lot of his items
that were flooded and things that were displaced because he was moving one thing from another and he put it into his workspace area which is in the front of the home. And it is that workspace area that where it contributed to the
violation that uh was there in November, December and so um with that um he um it is so it's now taken care of. I had more information to
provide for you but I will not go there because it is taken care of. Um but since my son has resided at the home uh code enforcement as I mentioned has provided intervention several times and I've always taken full responsibility
and fully cooperated. the motivation that has to be put there uh because of my son's disabilities are extreme and so I um and he has stepped up to the plate but
more than important than that people caring have stepped up to the plate that help to help him and I have aided him I have secured dumpsters I've enlisted third parties to help him I've provided supplies I've covered expenses I have
physically assisted myself in trying to remedy the situation. But more than anything, the most important thing is the goal. And I really did learn this from Officer Lewis and his uh patience
with my son because it honestly it's more than what I going into all this I had in within me. And um so I've learned that maintaining a demeanor that is aimed at successful compliance is the
most important thing. Not getting frustrated, not getting angry. And so that has been what I have done. While there have been there's been a history, as I told you, of violations,
but there's also a history of 100% compliance. And so I stand here and I'm a fearful that this isn't the last time you will see me. I hope it is, but it may not be. The challenges that my son was first
diagnosed with as a child will not go away. And they will continue. But I can tell you about this about myself that I will always continue to be part of the solution. And when I can see I can do better, I will do better. And what I
want to also point out that I have two people here uh and they have provided documentation which I'm pleased to give to the court if the court would want it. They have watched uh my son grow up since he was uh for Suzanne, my sister
over there. She has a background in special needs and disabilities. She has a master's degree. She's worked as a special education teacher, as a special education counselor, and a special education administrator for Orange County. And so she has provided
documentation as well as Teresa Murphy. And Teresa Murphy again is a special education teacher and she I met Teresa in an organization that's meant to support parents that have children with disabilities. I met her I met her 40
years ago in a group called Parent to Parent. And so she has children of disabilities herself and she went on at in her uh later years to uh get a degree in disabilities and to teach disabled
children. So, you know, it's hard when those disabled children become adults. And I will tell you that my son gets no assistance anywhere. He is fully reliant on me. Absent of me, he would be
homeless. And so again, it's a tough situation and it doesn't relieve me of my obligation. But uh so I want to say I will fully cooperate today always. Um but in going
forward I um the most effective intervention is through cooperation and so I hope that I can continue that and I also ask in given these circumstances and until this date and I understand
this date is um been condensed I will say um but um given time consider considerations really do help with a positive outcome and in the past officer Lewis has provided those
those uh leniencies to get the job done and so I hope in the future that I will still have that opportunity. Um I have other documents which like I say appear to be very irrelevant at the time at
this time. Um but again my statement pictures of the home as it is today at 306 South Singleton. Um there was a situation where the trailer they were carrying stuff away in was was uh hit
damaged. They can't get the tail down related to the interesting thing. It was hit by a city vehicle while it was at a stop sign or stoplight. Um, I have the statements from uh Suzanne Buchanan and Teresa Murphy. I have references from
his neighbors, the only adjacent neighbors that he has that about the about the citizenship that Steve brings and the help he brings to to these women that live in the home. Um, I have his disability and medication uh or medical
documentation and a few other supporting things. But again, it's not here to take away from the fact there was a violation. I am responsible for that violation and I always will take um take that responsibility very
seriously. >> All right. Thank you, Mr. Sheric. I appreciate your story and uh your preparation for today. Oh, you're more than >> um actually I I I serve on the board for a small school that uh uh is for
children with motor disabilities in Winter Park, uh SECO. Um, and right now we as a board are trying to locate additional real estate because what we're looking for is for an adult living facility because as you expressed
children with disabilities become adult with disabilities and your son is fortunate that you're able to assist them with housing and everything. So, um, those are all very important things and I'm glad that you guys were able to work out with Mr. uh with Officer Lewis uh a time frame for you guys to bring
into compliance and hopefully it doesn't come back again. But uh yeah, I guess that's No, I appreciate the story. I certainly understand and you know, obviously I think we all appreciate the efforts. I didn't see any pictures of how it looks today, but I'm sure it looks great compared to where it was. So, um I'm sure with the assistance of
other people in the neighborhood or with, you know, family, um hopefully he can help maintain that standard a little bit better. So, um, do you want to add anything else or just go ahead and issue my order or >> All right. >> Um,
>> I met I met this morning with uh Steven who is her son on site and I've spoken to Miss Sherik this morning by phone. I explained to him why I was requesting the finding a fact. >> Yeah. >> And and the repercussions of that. So I
I think this morning maybe he understands. >> Okay. uh he has never given me a hard time at all. >> Mr. Sher, you understand that the city does have hard costs that you'll have to reimburse them for $105. >> I do. And you know, and like I say, I I
acknowledge the process. I cop I will cooperate with the process. The fine, in fact, I as I understand it makes me immediately liable. Is that the case? Well, it just establishes that there was a violation
and in the event it happens again, it could be classified as a repeat violation. Um, I think it's just I mean, obviously it sounds really bad, but it establishes that this property was something that there were issues with in the past. It doesn't change any
rights that you have, any ability to, you know, Yeah. you would still have those same uh hearing rights, due process rights you would if the violation happens again. It's just now it's classified as a repeat violation. And so potentially if I really you catch
me in just an awful mood, maybe it would just have higher penalties or officer Lewis is just feeling really, you know, vindictive and really wants the highest fines possible. There's an avenue for that because it's a repeat violation. I mean I mean it is what it is. We do have to establish that the violation happened, but you know, with it being
cured and everything now, it's that's all it's going to say. And then it's just the hard cost would need to be reimbursed to the city. Okay. >> Okay. >> All right. >> Okay. I thank you very much. [snorts] >> Of course, I appreciate it. >> I also thank Officer Lewis. >> Yes. >> Okay. >> And uh Okay. So, um I've accepted and
considered documentary evidence including photos of warrant testimony relating to matter from city staff. Um, I find that the property located at 306 South Singleton Avenue is now in compliance with sections 12-23 and
13-73. Um, notwithstanding that, the city has incurred hard cost in the amount of $105.66, which amount needs to be uh um paid uh by the respondent. What is it 30 days or
is that the wrong wrong number? Your your honor, just for clarification purposes, that would have shown on the slide had the presentation been necessary. The vehicle violation 1373 was brought into compliance before. >> Okay. So, just the only one is the 1223. >> 1223.
>> 1223. I'm sorry. Okay. So, the 1223 there was a violation up until today. And then the uh uh fine is 100 fine. Sorry. The hard cost is $105.66. And that is what payable within 30 days
to the city. >> Yeah. >> All right. And a certified order may be recorded in the public records. Um it is so ordered. Thank you. >> Okay. Thank you. And the documents I have here, uh should I keep them as my property or should they become court
property? >> You you you can keep them. I didn't really enter them into evidence. I didn't really consider them. No offense, but it's the same kind of mood, right? [laughter] >> Thank you. Thank you ladies. All right.
Moving forward with [sighs] 26-02554 Lenor Avenue. >> Yes sir. Again, I'd like to enter in the evidence exhibits the uh notice of hearing, notice of violation,
um and the cost recovery statement of $88, I'm sorry, $153.89. >> [snorts] >> Okay. Uh this is uh case number 2602. Uh respondent is a Jeffrey Joe Damron.
Uh the violation address is 554 Lenor Avenue here in Titusville. Uh it was mailed to the address of record of post office box 1373, Pikeville, Kentucky. Uh the violations are the Titusville
Code of Ordinances section 6-109208 International Property Maintenance Code section 304.1 General Exterior Maintenance uh section 6-109 2018 IPMC section 304.7
roofs and drainage. Uh the initial inspection on the property was uh October the 2nd of 2025. The get the date given to comply was uh November the 2nd, 2025.
Uh the notice to respondent was was uh mailed certified in first class. Uh certified mail was returned uh on 7725. That's wrong. It should be 11725. I believe it was uh the notice of hearing was posted at city
hall and on the property where the violation exists on December 11th, 2025. Uh certified and first class mail were mailed on 121125. Uh certified mail sent to listed owner
was returned unclaimed unable to forward. >> That must be the wrong date there. >> It is. [clears throat] It is. That's my bad for not catching that. Okay. Um during routine patrolling the area, I found a vacant residential structure with damage to the roof covering, the roof deck, and in the roof
framing at the right rear and front and right front porch area. Uh the damage has exposed some of the roof framing and allows water intrusion into the structure. Uh I've had no contact with the owner. Uh attempts to contact him through utility records and previous
building permit applications have been unsuccessful. Uh none of the violations have been corrected as of this morning. Uh that's the general exterior maintenance what it shall be.
And the roofs and drainage. The drainage is a little bit of a misnomer, but it's the roof that's the issue. Uh this is at the rear of the property close to what would be the garage. Uh you can see the damage to the roof.
Uh that's just a backed out picture. You can see how how the water has got in there and causing the sophet uh over to the left hand side of the garage door there where the sophet is trying to fall down. Uh that is the right front area of the porch. Uh you'll see the large hole
there. Uh there's no telling how much other holes or damage may be there under that straw. Uh there's on the porch looking out. You can see this is a closeup here. You can see further back against that wall that water is going inside of the
building. So the conclusions are that on the general exterior maintenance, nothing has been repaired. Uh the roofs and the drainage no repairs done either. Um, it's our recommendation to order a respondant to correct the violation on
before February 6, 2026 by repairing the exterior and the roofing system of the structure. uh if they do not that we they assess the administrative cost of 153.89
and if the respondent does not comply by February 6, 2026, uh it was requested that a fine of $100 per day per violation be imposed for the till the for each day the violation continues.
Uh that being said, approximately 10 or 11 days ago, a local construction company called left message for me that they were working with the owner to try to get a permit issued on this property.
Uh I called them back and spoke to them at length. They were couldn't get any kind of contact information for him, but as of this morning, no permits filed. Uh this property has been vacant for quite some time. Uh as a matter of fact,
I want to say last year 23 or 241. They m officer Flanigan brought this property for the same things. They had a permit issued and then it got withdrawn. So it's just sit here and got even
worse. It's been vacant for quite some time. >> All right. And there's no one outside. Officer uh Glennon, there's no one outside, I would imagine, for this one. >> All right. Okay. [snorts]
Just go ahead and enter uh the ruling then. I've accepted and considered documentary evidence, including photos and sworn testimony relating to this matter from city staff. I find that respondent Jeffrey Joe Damron is the owner of the property with the address
554 Lenor Avenue, Titusville, Florida. I find that all required notices were provided in accordance with chapter 163 Florida statute and city code and notice was met for this hearing. Based on the evidence presented, I find that violations of section 6-109 IPMC
subsection 304.1 and 304.7 um which are general exterior maintenance and roof and drainage exist upon the property and respondents were given a reasonable amount of time to correct the violations but have either
failed or refused to do so. Additionally, I find that the city has incurred costs in the amount of $15389. Such amount shall be included with this order. Respondent shall be given until February 6, 2026 to correct the
violations. Respondent shall be responsible for notifying the code enforcement officer of completion of such corrections, who shall then confirm the status of the violation. If respondent fails to correct the violations by February 6, 2026, a fine
will be entered in the amount of what are we looking for? $100 per day. >> Yes, sir. >> Yeah. Of $100 per day until the violation comes into compliance. Further and future violations of the same section shall be classified as repeat violation. Certify order may be recorded
in the public records of Breard County. It is so ordered. Let's go to our final one for today. >> That is 26-03 1235 Thorough Streets. >> But before we move forward in the last
order that was 100 per day per violation for both violations. >> Oh, I'm sorry. Yes, there's two viol Yes. Sorry. $100 per day per violation. until the violation comes into compliance. >> And additionally, the case prior 26-01.
>> Mhm. >> Uh in the order you had said 10556 for cost of recovery. >> Yeah. >> Yeah. It's actually 17150. >> Oh, did I pull the wrong number? Sorry, Evelyn. Let me make sure.
>> Okay. I I I I had written down what you said verbally and didn't look at the uh >> Yes, I'm that's the wrong one. >> And I have already spoke with a respondent and they're aware of it and that would be correct in the record. >> Yes. 17150 for 306 South Singleton. All
right. >> Thank you, sir. >> Thank you for clarifying. >> All right. >> Can I have one moment before we start? [sighs] >> Yes. [laughter] So, I have three exhibits to submit for your review. The first is the notice of
uh violation and affidavit. The second is the notice of today's hearing and affidavit. And the third is the cost recovery statement in the amount of $153.89. I do want to note that the respondent is listed incorrectly, but I have verified
that the amount due is correct. >> Thank you. Is this the right one? This one is for Oh, is this owned by BAF Asset 6 or Jeffrey Damron? >> B AF asset 6. >> Your cost recovery one has the wrong respondent name.
>> Correct. That's Yeah, I've verified that the respondent was listed wrong, but the amount was wrong. >> I got Okay. So, the same is the same amount as the last one. >> They were both identical amounts. >> And that's not completely out of the ordinary, but are we sure?
Are we sure? I'm just >> I don't >> just here look because I mean either one of them is wrong or you you guys have spent the exact same amount of time >> is is we do insp [snorts]
>> correct those are based on formula per >> All right. I just wanted to make sure I wouldn't have triggered un except that you know the name was the same. So, >> but it is very possible with the same officer. >> Yeah. All right. [snorts] Sorry. Give me one second. Let me reorganize. Okay.
All right. Go ahead. [snorts] So, this is the initial hearing for case number 26-03. Our respondent is BIF asset 6 LLC. Corporation Service Company is the registered agent. The violation address
is 1235 The Rose Street, Titusville, Florida. >> [snorts] >> And our mailing address is 501 Plaza on the Lake Sweet 200 Austin, Texas for the property owner and 1201 Hay Street, Tallahassee, Florida for the registered
agent. We have seven active violations at the property. The first is section 6-56 for building permits required. The next is 6-109 of the PI uh IPMC subsection 605.1 for
electrical equipment. Subsection 30413 for windows, skylights, and doors. Subsection 304.6 for exterior walls. Subsection 304.7 for roofs and drainage. Subsection 6506.2
2 for sanitary drainage system and finally 603.1 for mechanical appliances. So the initial inspection was completed October 2nd 2025. A copy of the uh NOV was handd delivered
to the tenant. The date given to comply was November 3rd 2025. Certified and first class mail was listed was sent to the owner and registered agents on October 3rd, 2025. Certified mail for the registered agent
was signed for October 9, 2025. And the certified mail for the property owner has not been sent signed for nor returned. Uh notices of hearing for today's hearing were posted on the property and at city hall on December 20th, 2025.
certified and first uh first class mail were was sent on December 9, 2025. Certified mail for the registered agent was uh signed for on December 13, 2025. And certified mail for the property owner was signed for on December 15,
2025. So I was contacted by the tenants for a minimum housing inspection of the property. The initial complaint concerned the heating and cooling system not working correctly, leaks inside the house. Upon my inspection of the
property, multiple violations of the property maintenance code were identified. Uh so contact with the owner November 11, 2025, I received email correspondence from the property management company Main Street Renewal
concerning the notice of violation. [snorts] An on-site meeting was set for November 20th. Um, representatives of Main Street Renewal did not attend and nor was there any responses to a
follow-up email or voice messages left. That being said, today at approximately 11:50 a.m., I did get a follow-up email from Main Street Renewal um
at letting me know they knew about today's hearing. They were unable to uh attend but wanted to make contact to discuss what was needed to um correct the violations moving forward.
So, but as a result of my reinspections in November, the property was found vacant and signs no uh listed it as um for lease.
Um I've not done an interior inspection of the structure. Uh, I have noted some exterior repairs, uh, including paint, but um, review of the building department records found no
applications received for anything on the heating and cooling system. So, I've got uh these are photos taken during the initial inspection in October. So, these are photos of the heating and cooling system for the
property. It shows a new system had been installed uh in 2023. Uh research found no a previous mechanical permit issued in 2017. There's no permit, no inspections on
this system and it was not working at the time of the inspection. So, this photo is um I found a light switch and light fixture that was not working in the um living room um kitchen
area of the uh house. Uh this is for the doors. Um the sliding glass door on the back side of the property. Uh the flooring had ev evidence of leaks and um damage to the
floor and the um baseboards. This is a picture of the same door from the exterior. And you can see there's exterior damage um to the exterior walls as well. Uh there were also at the front door of
the residence again um signs of damage to the flooring and the baseboards at the front door. Um this is a uh picture of the west side of the property. We've got the exterior
siding is coming off. Um and this is the area that's been repainted. Um these are photos of sophet and um around the um sliding glass door on the rear of the structure.
Just another photo of that area. Uh this is at the front door. The gutters on the front door do not have any um downspouts and there's leaks um between the gutter and the um fascia and
sophet. So this is a photo of the sanitary drain line for the uh washer and dryer. Um there is a break in the pipe and that pipe had when the washing machine um empties it's causing erosion in the
yard. So the conclusions of fact um so permits were not obtained for the replacement of the me mechanical equipment. We have electrical switches that are not working inside the structure. We have evidence
of leaks and the door frames not being weathertight. We've got um exterior walls with areas of rotted material. Um on the exterior walls we have evidence of u missing uh
downspouts and issues with the gutters as well as uh sophet and fascia. Sanitary drainage. We have a um broken drain line from the wash machine causing erosion and the mechanical appliance.
Again we did not have a permit issued for the re uh replacement of the system. So, in light of the email today, I would like to request [clears throat] that the respondent be ordered to correct the
violations otter before noon of March 6th, 2026, giving them 60 days. In order to um correct these violations, I'm requesting that the [laughter] heating and cooling system, a permit is
obtained and completing all required um building inspections, that the electrical equipment is repaired and not and um demonstrated that it is working for the windows and doors. uh repairs completed to those
doors um to return those into a weathertight condition and repair any damaged flooring or interior surfaces. Exterior walls again repair any rotten or damaged um materials on the exterior of the house
for roofs and drains. um complete repairs to the gutters um and uh repairs to soften and fascia damaged uh sanitary drainage. Complete the repair of the broken drain line and
address the um erosion in the yard and the mechanical appliance again um to obtain that permit and all required inspections by the building department. If the respondent does not comply by
that March 6, 2026 date at noon, it is requested that a fine of $100 per day per violation for the seven violations be imposed for each day the violation continues. [snorts] I'm asking that administrative costs be uh imposed in
the amount of $153.89 and that the respondent contact me to verify compliance. All right. Now, I have to repeat everything you just said, too. All right. All right. I have accepted and considered documentary evidence,
including photos and sworn testimony relating to this matter from city staff. I find that respondent BAF Asset 6 LLC is the owner of the property with the address 1235 Toro Street, Titusville, Florida. I find that all the required notices
were provided in accordance with chapter 163 full statute and city code and notice was met for this hearing based on the evidence presented. I find that violations of city code exist upon the property and respondents were given a reasonable amount of time to correct the
violations but have either failed or refused to do so. The corrective actions and violations are [clears throat] all right. Section 6-56 needs to obtain a required mechanical permit for the HVAC.
Section 6-109 IPMC 605.1. Uh complete repairs to the dining room switch and fixtures. Um same thing subsection 304.13 for windows, skylights, door frames. Uh
complete repairs to the exterior doors and assembly and replace damaged sheetrock, baseboard, and damaged flooring. Subsection 304.6 exterior walls. He needs to repair all holes and cracks. Replace deteriorated materials and
exterior walls and replace damaged sheetrock and baseboard and flooring damage inside the house. 30 or 4.7 regarding roofs and drainage. Repair damaged gutters and downspout. Repair complete repairs to soft and fascia board so they are free and loose
of rotten material. Uh subsection 506.2 two regarding sanitary drainage system maintenance. That's to repair broken drain lines from washing machine and repair repair soil erosion in yard. Section I'm sorry subsection 603.1
mechanical appliances again obtaining the required mechanical permit for the new HVAC system. Uh respondent additionally I find that the city has incurred costs in the amount of $153.89 89. Such amounts shall
be included with this order. Respondent shall be given until March 6, 2026 to correct the violations. Vi respondent shall be responsible for notifying the code enforcement officer of completion of such corrections who shall then confirm the status of the violations.
If respondent fails to correct the violations, a fine will be entered in the amount of $100 per day per violation until the violations come into compliance. Further and future violations of the same section shall be classified as repeat violation. A certified order may be recorded in the
public records of Bvard County. It is so ordered. Um that is it for our hearings. Do we have a report from the code enforcement manager? >> No sir. >> All right. And then I will go ahead and adjourn us here at 221.