Municipal Code Enforcement Board - Regular Meeting

Today's meeting of the Municipal Code Enforcement Board is called to order on 03/25/2026. Please rise for the pledge of allegiance. Please be seated. Agendas of today's meeting are on the wall at the entrance to chambers. Please remember to turn off your cell phone.

The municipal code enforcement board consists of seven members who are appointed by the city council. We serve voluntarily. It is this board's intention to promote, protect, and improve the health, safety, and welfare of the citizens of Clearwater by providing this equitable, effective, and inexpensive method of enforcing certain codes within the city. The board considers new business items in two parts. First, the violation and then affirmative relief. Formal rules of evidence do not apply. Each side is limited to fifteen minutes. The board may grant additional time. All proceedings will be conducted in a calm civil manner. Individuals who conduct themselves otherwise will be asked to leave.

If necessary, they will be escorted from chambers. Now I ask all who plan to speak to please rise and be sworn in by the clerk.

She's her firm to tell the truth, right? Thank you.

First order of business is to review and approve the minutes of last month's meeting. May I have a motion to approve the minutes? Motion to approve. Second. All approved?

Aye. Aye.

All opposed? Motion passes.

We're gonna go a little bit out

of order today, in that rather than begin with our new business items, we're gonna take up a lean case reduction based on a request from our secretary. This is under on page six, under item five, other board action, and this will be case 97Dash24. Consider request by petitioners, RE Capital Management LLC at twenty eighty Douglas Avenue to reduce the fine regarding exterior surfaces and if approved, issue an order that specifies a fine that includes administration costs and establish the date payable or the lien will revert to its original amount. Is there anybody here to speak on this?

Thank you, board members and thank you, Nicole. Wonderful Nicole. Thank you.

Would you state your name and your address and involvement for the record, please? Yes, my

name is John Liu, that's spelled LIU. I'm a state certified building contractor filling in for the property owner. And Nicole does have an authorization letter that's notarized and signed by the property owner. My address is 5447 Haines Road North Number 235 Saint Petersburg, Florida 32714.

Thank you.

So, basically, the property, while you had, open case cases, it accrued a lien, and I don't know the exact dollar amount. I don't know to memorize it, it's around 70 something thousand dollars. The property has been, brought into compliance. It looks a lot better today, than it did previously, and Greg here is going to attest to that fact. I actually, the first time I stopped by the property was this morning. I was expecting to see worse than I saw. It looked looked pretty darn good. It will look even better because I'm going to be brought in to do the work from this from this point forward. So the property owner is respectfully requesting that, as you know, the lien be reduced and mitigated to actual hard costs, and we'll get that paid ASAP. And that's all I have

to say, really.

Unless you have any questions.

We may later.

Okay. I'll stay on side. Thank

you. Inspector Dixon.

Afternoon, board. Inspector Dixon, City of Clearwater Coating Points. What he said is true. There there was rotten wood around the roof flying, and then a a tree fell on the house after the storm since '24. And him and an associate stepped in, they replaced the roof, got all the wood replaced. The the grounds were in pretty bad shape. There's a shed that was deteriorating. The fence is deteriorating. That's all been removed. All the dead vegetation's been gone. So the city's happy to look at them.

K. Please step to the mic, sir.

I'm usually loud and overbearing, so I'm just curious. The property owner is not the same owner as who incurred the liens originally.

I think

that's an important detail to know.

Yes, thank All

right. Does the city have a position? We're good for administrative costs, is that what your thumbs up is meant to indicate? All right. Madam Secretary, do you have a number for the administrative costs on this project?

I have it, Chair.

Oh, there you

go, sorry. $10.96 and 20¢.

And confirm with the screen, the city's content with that number?

Yep, we're good with it.

Okay.

Do we have any questions?

No questions from the board?

None. All

right, with no questions, can I get a motion?

I move to enter an order reducing the amount of the lien to the administrative costs of $1,096.20 payable within thirty days. Is that what we have? Thirty days?

Yes.

Or the lien will revert to its original amount.

May I have a second? Second. All right. All in favor? Aye. All opposed? Motion carries. Thank you, sir. Now we'll go back to one. Page two, new business items.

Declaration of violation. Agenda page two.

Agenda page two.

Okay. After

the cover page. All right. Our next order of business, case 3.1 has been withdrawn. Case three number 3.2 is continued until May. Case 3.3 continued from 02/25/2026. Case number 23Dash26, find respondents Connor Petron at 3804 Brigadoon Circle in violation of code for exterior surfaces and issue an order with a compliance deadline and fine if compliance is not met. Is everyone here to speak on that case? Inspector Stevens, you have the floor.

Yes, board. This case is actually we're requesting a declaration of violation. The property has been bought into compliance. It was just way after the compliance date. So we'll just be requesting that declaration, please.

Sir, are you here to speak on this case?

Well, I'm the contractor of the owner. I don't need to if everything resolved. You

can address the board if you like, sir.

You wanna fill So 3804. We're doing circle.

Very good. Thank you, sir. Basically, the inspector you're requesting, you're saying that the that he's now in compliance and you're simply requesting

Declaration of violation, which is basically like you're free bound guilty,

but you're not being charged anything. Fine, I accept that. All

right. Does the board have any questions? Can I get a declaration of violation?

I move to find the respondent was in violation of the code as referred to in the affidavit. In this case, the violation was corrected prior to today's hearing and to enter an order that no fine be imposed. If the respondent repeats the violation, the board may order a fine of up to $500 for each day the violation continues to exist.

May I have a second? Second. All right. All in favor? Aye. All opposed? Motion carried. Thank you, sir.

Thank you. Thank you, the board.

Our next case 3.4 continued from 02/25/2026. Case 24Dash26, find respondents Robin Farley, the state at 1506 South Hillcrest Avenue in violation of the code for abandoned building and issue an order with the compliance deadline and fine if compliance is not met. Is there anyone here to speak on that case? Inspector Jensen, you have the floor.

We might just run it from

It's not open up

to slideshow, we'll get through it.

Dave Jensen, code inspector with the City of Clearwater. This is case 2426 at 1506 Hillcrest for an abandoned building. I apologize, the slides aren't gonna slide. There's one violation for an abandoned building in 31503 B2. These are the dates of the notices and postings. That is the posting the posting

of

the notice of the hearing.

Oh, here we go.

Do what I can. It's often very little.

Let's go back

to this.

This is the property back almost two years ago in May 2024. There was an Inunuk abandoned vehicle on the property that was removed. However, the overgrowth was present and it's been pretty much the same way ever since. We've abated the new sits here six times under a prior board order. We just did a mowing and abatement on the property last week.

This is from, I believe, yeah, July just last year. Same thing. Probably the front and rear yards are all overgrown. Again, we've had to go and abate the property six different times. The owner of the property is deceased. Apparently she passed way back in 2023. There's been itinerant traffic through the house. However, there haven't been any utilities on at the residence since October 2023. And according to neighbors, there's been no activity there as far as anyone living or occupying the residence. So we're asking for the abandoned building.

Compliance to be met for abandoned building by utilities being turned on, property being sold, occupied, rented, demolished, and the property being maintained. Requesting compliance on for 04/25/2026, we're applying $150 per day for each day to violation of this.

Thank you. Board, do you have any questions? Can I get a first violation, please?

I have a question. Have you been in touch with the new owner?

There is no owner. No, owner

is No

heir? But

there's no heir?

According to, well, again, is according to the neighbors. There was a son and daughter that lived there at one point. However, neither one of them could keep up with the property and they had not seen any. There's been no evidence of anyone being there for, I've been looking at the property now for almost two years.

Thank you.

All right. Any other questions?

I just, if nobody owns it, who is supposed

to pay the fines? Well,

the deceased party is still technically the owner. It would be the estate. So basically, was gonna I would defer to our counsel to answer that probably better than I did.

Owns the property. It's just when you die, the property automatically goes to your heirs.

Right.

We don't track that down. We name the estates, and then we record against the property, and then whoever inherits it will then assume the lien that's created through this process.

I gotcha.

Yes. And according to the property appraiser, it's Robin Farley is the owner's name. It's still in property appraiser as under her name. So there's there is no trust you know, state established at this point by the that's why.

That's how we choose who to name is we just look at the property appraiser and the tax collector records and then we go with that. We don't order title work unless it's we may do that for an abatement or something like that. But if for a case like this, we wouldn't do a title search. Any

other questions? May I have the first motion, please?

Mr. Chairman, I move to bind the respondent. In violation of the code as referred to in the affidavit in this case.

Second? Second. All in favor? Aye. All opposed? Motion carries. I have a second motion, please.

Mister chairman, I I move to enter an order requiring the respondent to correct the violations on or before 04/25/2026. If the respondent does not comply by that date, the board may order a fine of $150 per day per violation for each day each violation continues to exist. If fines and fees remain unpaid three months after such lien is filed, the city is authorized to foreclose, collect or settle such lien.

I have a second. I'll second it.

All in favor? Aye. All opposed? Motion carries.

Thank you.

Thank you, inspector. Our next case 3.5 has continued to May. 3.6 has also continued to May. 3.7 continued from February 20, fifth twenty twenty six. Case 34Dash26 find respondents William Black at 292390 Willow Tree Trail in violation of code for unsafe building, conditional order with the compliance deadline and fine if compliance is not met.

Is there anyone here to speak on this case? Mister Black. Inspector, I believe you have mister Black behind you. Good day, mister Black. How are you? Alright. Good. State your name and address.

Yeah. William Black. 2390 Willow Street Trail.

Thank you. I seem to remember this case from

Last month.

Last month. And so it would appear city is still seeking a, inspector, that the city is still seeking a violation for a code for an unsafe building?

Yes, sir.

I'm James Larson, building inspector, Willow Tree Trail. It's all the same information as last time, but most important is for us, there there has been some progress. Remember, he had a demolition permit?

Yes, sir.

And I was out there yesterday, and I was able to get some pictures of the property. These are previous what the city is asking for is within the next sixty days that he get this house put back together. This this is the house as of yesterday. This is the dumpster in his front yard. This is interior where demolition has occurred. Drywall is removed.

These pictures are from yesterday, inspector. Okay. Yes, sir.

That's right. Put the date on there for us.

We all know.

And mister Black's been in communication with me throughout the process. For compliance to be met, we're looking for complete restoration to meet minimum code requirements or demolish the remaining structure and make the yard and swimming pool safe. The recommendation if the structure is not in compliance by 05/29/2026, the city asked the board to authorize entrance onto the property to correct the violations. The city will correct the violation by any means necessary with any reasonable cost to be applied as liens against property. After three months from the recording date of such lien, if the fines and fees remain unpaid, the city's attorney's office is authorized to foreclose, collect, or settle such lien using any legal or equitable remedies available under

the law.

Thank you, sir. Mister chair, before the before we pass, may I add a few things to the to presentation? Yes, please. That as you recall, if you recall last month, I specifically asked for a continuance because I wanted to look into the permit issue. There's nothing in Florida law that says that when the city issues a permit, that that would now exempt that property from nuisance codes, which is what our abandoned building code, the codes that's being brought to you today.

So, all the building permit does is authorize construction according to the plans that are part of that permit application. So, the rule still applies. That's why we to the same remedy that we requested before. The other thing to add is that this is a homesteaded property. So, this is our standard language that's in front of you right now about foreclosure.

But we are prohibited by law from foreclosing on a homestead property. But that's the only specific provision of law that changes the circumstance for a homestead property. All the other rules apply in terms of nuisance and the conditions of the property and the city's ability to go and abate through demolition. And so I just that's kind of closing note here. The request is any means necessary.

What we mean by that is demolition of the structure. So the Board, if the Board grants what we're requesting, if the house is not brought into compliance within the deadline that the board imposes, the city would then get bids from demolition contractors and then carry out a demolition and record a lien for the cost of that demolition against the property. So that lien would still show up in the public records. It would still impact the title and the ability to sell the property, but the city could not foreclose on that lien and take the property because of the fact that it's currently homesteaded as far as I can see in the records. So I just wanted to make sure that we're all clear in terms of what the proceeding is today, what the city is asking for.

And then also we do have some citizens, that that want to speak on this, and and I would request that the board hear from them before the board, makes a decision on this.

All right. Very good. Mr. Black, I'm sorry. Mr. Larson, did something you wanted to say? No, Okay.

There's other people I thought we

would say that. Mr. Black. My

intent was to just continue. So if there's a complaint specific, I will do the best I can with the pool. Main thing I need is power. My son is a pool mechanic, and maybe I could run a pool pump from a generator. I was just gonna continue the permit, and it's not realistic to put a house totally together. I would need another permit and various professionals and inspections if that runs into almost a year. I'm just trying to continue the project.

Understood. And you've, begun demolition?

Dem demolition to expose further damages.

Right.

The electrical contractor, architect, and there would be ductwork going on. In sixty days, that takes that long to order windows and have them delivered. Delivered.

Understood.

I just need to continue.

Do we have any questions? Excuse me.

I'd like to hear from the other citizens.

Alright. Thank you, mister Black. You'd like to sit for a minute. We'll hear from our other parties involved. Can you state your name and address for the record, please?

Stephanie Siste. 2479 Moorhaven Drive West. I'm so sorry, I didn't get your

name. Stephanie Sisti. Gotcha, thank you.

S I S T I. So I'm here on behalf of Woodgate Homeowners Association. I live in that neighborhood. And this is a letter a few of us came up with and I volunteered to read it today. We respectfully request your immediate action regarding the property at 2390 Willow Tree Trail.

The structure sustained significant fire damage in September 2023 and has remained in a severely deteriorated and unsecured condition for approximately two and a half years. Since that time, no meaningful progress has been made toward repair, rehabilitation or demolition. The current condition of the property presents ongoing concerns to the surrounding community, including a visibly compromised and deteriorating structure, potential safety risks due to neglect and lack of maintenance, an attractive nuisance that may invite trespassing, a negative impact on neighboring property values and overall neighborhood standards. Despite multiple continuances and extended opportunities granted to the property owner, there has been no demonstrable progress towards bringing the property into compliance. It is our understanding that property taxes remain unpaid for multiple years, further indicating an inability to resolve this matter independently.

While we are sympathetic to the owners personal circumstances, the prolonged inaction has placed an unfair and ongoing burden to the surrounding residents and community. Given the length of time this issue has persisted and the lack of progress, we respectfully request that the board take decisive action to affirm the property status as unsafe and uninhabitable if already not if not already designated, move forward with enforcement measures requiring demolition or full remediation, Utilize any available legal or municipal remedies to bring the property into compliance without further delay. Our priority is the safety, stability and integrity of our neighborhood. Residents have been patient throughout this extended process, but the current situation is no longer sustainable. Thank you.

Thank

you. Board, do you have any questions? Would welcome some input from the board.

I have one question. Have additional comments.

There's board for certain reasons.

Yeah.

Please.

My name is Susan Huddleston. I live at 2384 Willow Tree Trail directly next door to Mr. Black. I've lived next door to him for over twenty years. Our garages and driveways are together, about 25 feet apart, I guess. Prior to the fire, Bill had difficulty maintaining his house and property. So all of this did not

occur just

because of the fire. Could

you speak up? Repeat that.

Oh, prior to the fire, Bill had difficulty maintaining his house and property. So none of this occurred just because of the fire. Examples of these are there's been a blue car parked in front for many, many years, never going anywhere. His yard was not kept. His pool has been consistently green, and his fence was broken around the pool that would present a health and safety issue.

This was all before the fire, so continues. After the fire, I was patient because I felt bad for him and his health deterioration. But since his garage door and side garage door stood ajar this entire time, the smoke smell was overwhelming for over a year. During that time, I finally called the building code inspector first asking for help for Bill. I felt bad for him.

Knowing he was unable to repair what needed to be done and neighbors were tired of the mess. I spoke with the former inspector several times, and I don't feel like anything was ever done. Recently, due to lack of care of his palm tree in the back which is next to my property, the entire top of the palm tree fell into my yard and I had to pay to have somebody cut it and remove it. Next I have wheelchair van for my daughter and I had problems when she was in it starting it a couple times and finally found out a rodent had eaten the wire in it. And right after that, my other vehicle had rodent deposits in the filters.

I never had that before. That was all reason. Now I have to keep rodent repellent in both vehicles to prevent that. A deserted vacant home with easy access for anyone to enter at any time, day or night, makes me feel uncomfortable living next door. The home value also would be affected. I've gone through the system which has failed myself and my neighbors. That's all I have.

Thank you. Thank you.

My name is Laurel Cavins and we live two houses. I live next door to her. And for several years, the pool at least ten years has not been had any kind of the pumping going on. Black. We've had those black mosquitoes around our neighborhood. We've had trouble with the mosquitoes. The fencing, as she had said, holes in it that a young child could probably get into. The very back of it the front is boarded up. The backyard, which does have a fence around it now, but the windows are open. So we don't know, are there critters in there?

Does anybody has anybody seen any kind of health issues because of the animals possibly being in there? And that's what a lot of us are concerned about, plus the way it looks. Our house values are going down and it's been three almost three years. Very little has been done to that. They did work on it last weekend.

They cut some tree limbs down and one couch was on the side of the road. Other than that, we haven't seen a lot of progress going on or anybody working on it. So we are concerned about this. And what she said in the letter, you know, the rodents or if that's what they are, you know, we're all kind of subjected to protect our own property. So hopefully this will get done.

Does he have proof that he's got an engineer and financial? Does he have proof that he can do it within the thirty, sixty days? That's just what we want to know, you know, how far this is going to go, how long is it going to be. Thank you.

Thank you. Can I ask one quick question, ma'am? Yes. Did you say ten years on the pole?

At least. We've lived there for over forty years, and we could see through the fence. And like she said, it was either green or black. It's not filled up. It's not moving. So we know that nothing, the pool is just stagnant.

Thank you.

Thank you.

Sir, did you wish to speak?

Yes. John Cabins, 2003 And 78 Willow Tree Trail. What I just want to know is, does he have any insurance? And does he have any income? And he said he applied for a grant last month. We were here. He said he applied for a grant. And I'm wondering if what grant for how much? And did he have the house evaluated by an engineer to determine the cost of, you know, fixing it? And we've seen notices posted up there that the house was a nuisance.

And and it said there was gonna be fines after, I don't know, thirty days. There was gonna be a certain amount of fines every day. And I'm wondering, that's been that's been over a year ago. I'm wondering the amount of fines that have that have approved. I I mean, he is he going to be financially able to do this? And we know if the house is a it's run down and it's a nuisance. But can he afford to fix it? Does he have the means? And maybe you can Bill can tell you. Thank you.

Thank you.

Good afternoon. My name is Patrick Grafrey. My address is 3237 Master Drive in Clearwater. I'm a vice president of Clearwater Neighborhood Coalition, and one of the initiatives we undertook in 2025 was to assist any member with respect to code violations or code compliance issues. This HOA reached out to me in June 2025 to assist them with this matter.

We've listened to the history of it. We know the details of what's been going on for how long and the fact that this is an absolute eyesore in the neighborhood. I began attending your board meetings to see what you would be doing to protect neighborhoods from a residence that looks like this. And I've not been too impressed with what's been taking place. However, on February 25, the city moved to get authorization from you to go on the property to begin the process for demolition of this property.

And to everybody's surprise, mister Black made the first appearance to my knowledge at your meeting and indicated that he had secured a permit the Friday before that caused mister Simpson to request a thirty day continuance while he looked into the matter. I also recalled his board back in October 2025 requiring Mr. Black to have a structural engineer study his property to see if it could in fact be renovated or should in fact be demolished as an unsafe structure, including his financial ability to undertake renovation if that was decided. Mr. Black did not appear at that meeting, did not have that study done and presented no evidence whatsoever of being able to renovate his property.

It continues to be a problem going into year three and listening to what he's saying today, it'll probably go into year four. My concern, this HOA's concern and the neighborhood concern of our organization is we need to do something to protect the neighborhood from a residence like this. And I hope you'll take the firm action and decisive action in spite of what Mr. Black says he will accomplish. Will he be able to do that in a reasonable period of time? I would implore each of you to go visit this residence. It is an absolute disgrace. Thank you very much.

Thank you,

sir. Questions from the board?

I have a question for the city. What occurred in October 25 as far as the evaluation of the building and finances? Was anything done at that time?

I don't recall what that was spoken about at the meeting. I would need to review previous meeting records.

Mr. Chairman, I have just one question from Mr. Black. Mr. Black, where are you living at presently?

Ten minutes away. Do you need an address?

Well, no. Are you in a home or are you in a motel or what?

I'm in a room and a home.

Okay. That's all I'll need to know. Thank you.

Yeah. I have a question. The last time you did ask you said that you're applying for a grant. Has there been any progress on that?

Well, I can't drive that schedule. I believe I have the well, with all the pricing I believe I can do, I could complete it myself. I couldn't have a retirement too well, and I intend to. I've started now. I don't intend to stop, but it's not realistic. Anything sixty days. You know, there are permits. There are inspections. There's windows. There's a roof.

I am actively involved with Pinellas Recover's and a grant, and we're still discussing it, but I can't run their timeline. I was going to continue demo and continue what I can do right now, and hopefully soon I hear more.

So have you started do you have any architects drawing up plans or renovations, electrical plans?

Well, I don't intend to change a floor plan. I I would like to get I'll get ahold of architects soon to inspect trusses so that night, they can see where I could continue. The actual structure experienced the effects of Helena and Milton after the fire. So the structure is there. It's interior work, wiring, etcetera, and all all the inspections involved.

Mister Black, if you do not obtain the grant, do you have the finances to restore the house to its original condition?

I believe yes. I cannot upgrade basic. I believe I do.

Thank you.

Are you saying that you can only upgrade the basics?

Right. Restore it to its yeah, I couldn't upgrade anything. It would be outdated kitchen, outdated baths, and they work, you can live. It's important to me to restore power. I will abandon 95 degrees and no power probably most anytime.

Can I ask a question? Did you say

that you're doing the work yourself?

No. It's not realistic. I'm just overseeing an owner builder contractor.

Okay. Do

you have

some topside number that you're willing to spend on renovating this as opposed to just taking it down and rebuilding?

Taking it down just costs more money. Top side of $50,000 The person that's tearing the walls out can put them up and he's already passed inspections, and that's the work he does.

Inspector Olarsson? So we are hearing testimony from different people that there's been code like that, possible code violations for the last ten years, but also within the last two and a half years, they called the office and stuff. Has code enforcement always responded to their violations, their calls, or

I've worked for the city for six months. I'm honestly not familiar with any history. Chairman, can I speak to that, please?

If I may. We there have been cases, and we discussed this briefly last month. There have been other cases. There are fines. Is a history of process with this property.

But I would also say that what we're here for today is specific to the code section three-1503B2, which is what was cited and brought to you today. That's the we sometimes refer to it as unsafe buildings, but this is a nuisance code, in the city's nuisances code, and it's specific to buildings which are abandoned, boarded up for a period of six months, partially destroyed for any period of time, or left for a period of three months in a state of partial construction, provided that any unfinished building, which has been under construction for six months or more shall be deemed or presumed to have been left for an unreasonably long period of time in the sense of this subsection. So that's Three-fifteen 03, Nuisances B2, and I think it's pretty clear. I don't think it's even been debated at all by Mr. Black that this is a partially destroyed building that we're dealing with here.

Most of the discussion is centered around what the remedy is and whether or not the remedies of rehabilitation is a realistic remedy. But I would just say that that's our focus today is on that code section and what we're presenting to the board today regarding the partial destruction of this building and whether or not the city should be allowed to go and demolish it after a certain period of time.

I guess, Mr. Simpson, my question is, why has it taken two and a half years for this to get to this point? It was my question I was raising to the city because the residents are quite upset, and they're looking for us to sort this out. But it's taken a long time for this to get before us, And that's what we're concerned about.

So, what I would say to that is we have broad cases. There are fines. There have been minor abatements performed on the property. As I stated earlier, according to the records, this is a homesteaded property, and it's a residential single family home, and, the remedy of the city taking the action of entering onto private property and demolishing, a home that is homesteaded according to the records is something that we are methodical and very thoughtful of. It's not something that we expedite.

It's something that a lot of people within the organization of the city need to look at and thoughtfully consider, before we do. We have had complaints. We're here now. We're putting the remedy before the board. And so we are asking for this remedy now, but it's not something that we take lightly. We do have to put a lot of time and consideration into a case like this.

I have a couple of questions. Okay. What I'm seeing here is the violation that's being presented to us is violation of code for unsafe building. And for the, I'm reading the, looking at the section three, fifteen oh three, fifteen oh two says the building shall be maintained in accordance with the building code, and we know this has been going on for at least two, two and a half years

or so.

Three years.

And then in section fifteen oh three, I'm looking at the resolution and it says buildings which are abandoned, boarded up for a period of six months, partially destroyed for any period of time or left for a period of three months in the state of partial construction provided that any unfinished portion, unfinished building or structure has been under construction, etcetera, etcetera. So, you know, we're well past the six month deadline. We're looking at a violation of code for unsafe building. And that begins that, we're looking at the fact that Mr. Black has a demolition permit only that to our knowledge, there's no, there's been no engineering study, there are no contractor quotes, there's been no necessarily a timeline put together, estimates from a contractor, some projection to indicate what the entire process involves and how long that's going to take.

So based on my knowledge in the industry, I believe that we're looking at a code compliance deadline of, was it sixty days? Yes, All right. That might be adequate for demo, but without any projection or any numbers and what the future brings without any of that in place. My question is, what constitutes compliance? Is it simply the demo permit being executed and the building boarded up, which keeps it in its current condition? I'm trying to understand here what what what is compliance? Is it the building fully restored?

The fact that he has demolition permit does not make the violation go away. So to be in compliance, the house needs to meet minimum codes, which it does not. The city is asking for sixty days. It's really up to you guys. If you think it's gonna take longer, what you wanna do, I mean, our opinion is, at this point, my personal opinion is he did get a demo permit.

He has done some demolition. The residents are saying, do you have the money to finish the job, etcetera, etcetera? I've spoke to mister Black. I probably got fifteen, twenty hours of speaking with him on the phone, meeting with him. You know, my recommendation has been to him to get a contractor because that's what we do. I'm a licensed contractor. I know you are, sir. At this point, it's really a matter of what's going to do next.

Mr. Chair, if I may add to that. Please. The permit that's out there now is not something that would be sufficient to bring it into compliance. It's my understanding it's just a partial demolition.

So even if he were to complete that permit, would still have a code violation for the section that's in front of you today. Now if he submitted for a new permit, for a full rehabilitation with plans and was able to get a permit that would bring it fully into compliance, then that would change the context of what, it wouldn't necessarily be an abandoned building at that point. Would be a construction site. But it would still violate the other section that's presented about it not being in compliance with the building code or the maintenance code. And at that point I saw Mr.

Garriott come coming to the podium, but it would be within the jurisdiction of the building official to determine whether or not we would continue to pursue the remedy of demolition. If it was in fact an active construction site with a permit issued, that the scope of the permit would be sufficient to bring the property into compliance. Mr. Chairman?

I think we I think our legal question is simply because he has a demo permit, do we have to wait till that permit expires? Does it start the process of getting it into compliance because in the time you could get the other plans and everything? Or I think that's a legal question for our attorney to answer.

Well, think that's, I think our answer is on the screen there. Thank you, Mr. Garriott, for helping bring that forward, that my question was about, you know, let's define compliance so that because we're playing that against a requested timeline of sixty days, and with only a demo permit in place, part of that equation is okay, so considering all of those factors, what's next? This defines compliance. It says complete restoration to meet minimum code requirements to demolish the remaining structure and make the yard of the swimming pool safe.

So complete compliance in my mind, correct me if I'm wrong, Mr. Larson, Mr. Garrett, that, that means the fence is repaired, pool is clean and working properly, the residence is restored and everything's done per code.

Kevin Garrett, Building Official City Clearwater. That's absolutely correct. That's what we are looking for. We are looking for code compliance. We want the yard, the pool, the house, everything to meet code. Minimum standards. Code is the worst building you can build. You know, that's you can always do more, but you can't do less than that. That's what we're looking for. And we are two and a half years into this, and there's been minimal, minimal until just a few weeks ago when pushed with this board hearing coming up, that then an interior exploration demo permit was obtained.

And I think the value on that was like listed at $5,000 or something. Don't quote me on that. How much do we have? So it wasn't to tear down the structure. It was to do interior exploration.

So the way this board works and the way we work with the board is if a property has gotten a board order and the date passed and they didn't comply, we turn in a notice of noncompliance. If we see somebody who is actively working, they're making progress, they're passing inspections, it looks like the road is gonna end up in the final place where we want, we are not gonna turn in a notice of compliance.

Thank you.

We would wait until we get the project done and turn in a notice of compliance. If there's no activity, if it's dilly dallying around, pardon the expression, but we are going to turn in a notice of noncompliance because it is not bringing the property into code compliance. That's our objective. We're not here to tear down properties. We're not here to clean up yards. We want the homeowner to have a responsibility and to take care of the property and leave us out of it basically. Any questions you have, I can try and answer them.

Thank you for that.

I have one question. We got a pool problem and a fence problem. So can you go in and do parcels or do you have

to it's all or nothing

for the city to go in?

For what's the question? If if he did

If he's

working on the interior, in the meantime, that pool's sitting out there unprotected and unmaintained.

Right. That is still a code issue that we could still pursue. It would probably take another citation to just address that. I don't know, we'd have to address how to really handle that best. But yeah, we could. It would still be a Because

that goes

into my next question, which is we've got an unsafe building order that has a timeframe that's flexible and a fine per day. Then we've got the nuisance abatement lien order which says five days and doesn't have any fines in it, so what's his incentive to move forward until the city decides to step in? So I'm not sure exactly what we're trying to do. We may need to do two different orders. One to get this building going and give that a day and a fine, and the other one

to get that pool taken care of.

Ma'am? Please. So to the first question about I your first question as a partial abatement. The city typically doesn't do partial abatements. We usually, if we get an abatement order, like what we're requesting here is a demolition order, which is essentially the city requesting authority to enter onto that property, demolish the structure, remove the pool.

What would be left would be sod and a grass lot essentially when the contractor was done. I don't know if Mr. Carey wanted to clarify anything there. Okay, we don't typically go in and just, if the windows are messed up, fix the windows and then leave, fix the pool and then leave the rest. We don't typically I'm

I'm basically concerned about the pool. How do you how do you get that done? No matter what orders we do.

Yeah. The pool is a health and safety issue. That's that's one that has to be taken care of.

It's a nuisance in the neighborhood. Nusmus. We

would defer to the board if the board wanted to put those different structures of the pool and the home on different timelines. I think that's, we don't, I don't think we necessarily would have an objection to that. We do have an issue with kind of piece milling it it's difficult us manage that. We don't want to assume some kind of ongoing maintenance obligations over anything on the property. And then I think on your second question was, can you refresh me on your second question there?

They just want to make sure they could do two time periods.

Oh, it was the fine. That's what it was the fine.

I'm sorry.

Yeah. We are not seeking a fine here because there are fines on this property. We sought fines in the past, Okay. And the the have have not had a material impact on the outcome. Alright. So those are still running somewhere in the Fines are running. We've performed minor abatements. At this point, we're looking for it ultimately. Right.

The fines will only end up as a lien. So there's no foreclosure action. So the abatement is the only thing that the city would be able to do in the short term.

Mr. Plum, you had something to offer?

Mr. Chairman, I just want to say that it's apparent that the demo permit alone is not sufficient to bring it up to compliance. And so if Steve wants to make two separate motions, I would support that or just a single.

Can I

ask just one more question? You're saying this is

a homesteaded property, but he hasn't lived there

in two and a half

years, and he can't live in it. So how can it be a homesteaded property?

Well, we, the case law on homestead is, first of all, I'll say that homestead is both a constitutional right of a property owner, but it also has a statutory place within the code enforcement process. The case law, there's a lot of case law from the courts interpreting homestead because it's a constitutional right. It's interpreted very much in favor of protecting a property owner's ability to claim homestead protection from creditors and things This like is personal

here, right?

As the city, we don't typically contest or try to litigate the question of homestead. If it's been determined that by the property appraisers, the tax collectors, those other constitutional officers, we typically accept that. There are claims that could be made to question the validity of the homestead. That really gets to the intent of the property owner and if they intend to live there at some point again, if the home was obviously destroyed by a fire here, It's my understanding. Know, we could ask Mr.

Black what he intends to do with the home. But the city, we typically don't take the position with regards to the validity of the homestead. If that's been determined to be homestead by the other constitutional officer, the county officers, then we typically accept that determination.

Thank you. Mr. Chairman, what I wanted I wasn't quite done with

I'm sorry.

I think before we take any motions, I think you need to explain to Mr. Black the seriousness of the matter that he needs to get his other permits applied for or Please. Mr. Black. It's become very clear to the Board that just having a demo permit is not sufficient. And you need to get everything into code compliance, so you would start to need to get all those together. Because we make a motion today, then you have the time that when this motion goes into effect to that time period to get those all together. So we just want you to be aware of that. Okay?

So pursue the next permit?

But you need to do it on a very timely basis.

Mr. Chairman, I'd like to address that. I understand my peers' consideration about the pooling yard, but it's really just putting a band aid on the whole problem. It should be and I understand mister Black's predicament. I also appreciate the residents' predicament that'll live near and around him. There's a lot of ifs on Mr. Black's part. It's either the city has been very patient for three years, so have the residents. And we have to take that in serious consideration today instead of putting everything to continuance. It's either all or nothing, Mr. Black. You have to do something and you're not doing enough.

Well, didn't start to stop. I started to continue from here on.

But you keep getting continuous for three years.

I got a permit and I hadn't before.

That's not sufficient.

You know, that's why I had a lawn service and other things during the time, you know, I got cancer diagnosis the month before the fire. You know, I didn't think I could handle both. I'm in now. That's why I pulled up exploratory in low, and I continue I intend to continue.

I just I just don't think you're gonna be able to pull anything off before in sixty days. Okay.

Well, sixty days would not be reasonable to complete the project, I'll but I think try to do something with the pool. The biggest obstacle for me is the power. I'd like to restore power. It's if the house is powered, the pool pump's powered. But many of the nuisance complaints seem to be mostly about exterior, and I'm working interior. So I can do more security. Okay. Security and pull.

Yes. Thank

you, sir. We appreciate it. Based on my understanding from what the city has offered, if there's significant progress, then the door may still be open. But I'm ready for the board to offer something.

Well, we doing a nuisance abatement on the property as a whole,

to start with? That seems to be the way it's going.

I mean, I think that's the way the city has positioned it now, so unless So there's

so then my my question to get to follow-up and just make sure we're clear on it. If we did a second nuisance abatement just for the pool and the fence, would the city take act would they go out and just take care of that under that separate order?

I'll have

to defer that to the to the building official. I don't see it as a legal question because I do think that we could legally separate them, but I do see it as a potential logistical issue. Madam Clerk has given, there's also a question in terms of

Would it make wording any difference to you whether we did them separately or just did it as one?

Logistically, I think to go in and take out just the pool would be I mean, we could do it. It would be more expensive to do that way than if you had a contractor just come in and and do the whole site. So I guess, yeah, we could do it.

Under the one or would you need a

separate one? We could do it

all under one. That that was really what we had in mind and we have done on other properties and other people have done that kind of thing.

What

How do we get

the pool

taken care of?

Well, would be the benefit of doing that? I mean, now it's breached as a whole and I mean, based on our what we've heard from the city, if he handles the pool, then the pool is off the table as part of the overall, and it's just down to the house and the other structures. I don't understand the benefit of separating it out going Exactly, through that

because one needs to be done right now.

Well, understood it needs to be done right now, but even if we ordered it now, there's still gonna be, you know, we're still following the rules and the guidelines and the timelines, it's, you know, so if we do the order as requested, then

Right now, it could have been three years ago.

Mean It doesn't make it any safer now.

Got you.

And you've got people coming in from the neighborhood saying, hey.

Wait. I'm gonna mosquito got rats.

We got this. We got that. So okay. So we just go with one.

I think we just make a motion for nuisance abatement. I agree.

I wanna say something.

Yes.

I think our job is to determine is the code in violation or not. It clearly is. That code that was specifically up there, that's what we have to address. And as a volunteer to this board, I've never been, never thought I'd have to decide to someone else get torn down or not. It's but it's not that. Yeah. If you could put that back up again, please. It is simply what section three dash one five zero three nuisances says. This property has been in this condition for more than six months. It's in violation. And I think that is the simplicity of what we need to address.

Thank you. Yeah.

All right.

Mr. Chair, if I may, there was a question that was raised to me on the sidebar and in terms of how the pool is a part of this case. The pool is a structure. Its current condition is clear that it's partially destroyed. And it is a structure that's subject to the building code.

So that's our position as a city in terms of how the because normally in a typical case we would bring the pool separately as an abandoned pool nuisance. So we do have a separate section that we can bring those issues separately, but we have not separated them in this case before you. But we include them as destroyed structures on the property, and we're trying to include them all together. I understand the concern in terms of the urgency. I think the board could separate timelines legally,

but

it does create a logistic issue. Because if we do get the authority to enter an debate today, if that time comes first off, there would be a deadline where we would come back with that as the building official described in terms of the non compliance affidavit. So that would be another point of consideration for the board. Assuming that it's still in violation at that point, then we come to the time that we actually are going to perform the abatement. We would hire contractors, get quotes, and then carry it out through our procurement process.

So we would be notifying the property owner of that process as it was ongoing. So I do think it could create some issues on the backside of the process there in terms of finding different contractors to do different things. And then the city entering the property, doing some work, leaving, coming back later and doing some additional work. Those are obviously we're going to follow the direction of the board today. So if that's the pleasure of the board, we'll figure out a way and we'll be back again to discuss it further.

But today we've asked for everything to be bundled together and for Madam Clerk and the others that have asked, that's why we've grouped them together. They're all structures subject to the building code, and they're all, partially destroyed in a in a in a nuisance state.

Thank you. Mister chairman,

I'd like to make a nuisance abatement single motion. Please. I move to find the respondent was in violation of code as referred to in the affidavit in this case. The violation was corrected prior

to debating.

Is that

the wrong one?

Wrong page. Page seven.

Page seven. Sorry. Yeah. Woah. I withdraw that.

Thank you.

Okay. I was on the wrong page. Sorry. I moved to enter an order finding the respondent violation of code and requiring the respondent to correct the violation within five days of the board's written order. Excuse me. Is that the right one?

Yes. May 29.

I believe they were asking for sixty days, May 29, am I?

Not five days, May 29.

May 29, correction. Not five days, 05/29/2026.

Let's get the correct date on this.

May '20

we just hear from the city to make sure we're getting everything that they're asking for?

Here it is right here, right?

I just want to make sure.

Okay.

All right. Twenty ninth.

Say the page exactly like that.

I'm sorry. Was in the sidebar conversation again, but as far as I've heard, I don't have any objections so Are you

No. Alright. Just wanna make sure. Alright.

Mhmm.

Alright. Let's do it.

Okay. So I moved to enter an order finding the respondent in violation of the code and requiring the respondent if the structure is not in compliance by 05/29/2026. The city has I don't know where I Yeah. The city may take responsible actions, including entry onto the property to abate and maintain the nuisance and charge the respondent with the reasonable cost, which will become a lien on the property. If cost, fines, and fees remain unpaid three months after such lien is filed, the city is authorized to foreclose, collect, and settle such lien.

May I have a second? Second. All in favor? Aye. All opposed?

Is this altogether? Before you bring that capital down, is this altogether? Yes. Yes. Okay. Yes.

You motion.

Okay. Aye.

One violation. Thank you. Thank you, Mr. Larson. Thank you, Mr. Black. Thank you, Mr. Garrett. Thank you, citizens. All right.

Moving on to our next item, case forty four twenty six, find respondents Cleveland Bluff Cleveland Gulf Bay LLC at 1417 Cleveland Street in violation of code for exterior surfaces, and issue an order with the compliance deadline and fine if compliance is not met. Inspector Souda, do you have the floor? Is there anyone here to speak on this case?

I'm trying to find

Item 3.8. Oh, I missed one. No, we didn't. No, 3.8. Yeah, you're okay.

Yeah, I'm fine.

Please step forward and state your name and address.

Nick Anderson. I'm property manager for 1417 Cleveland or Cleveland Gulf Bay LLC.

Thank you.

Real estate. Thank Thank you you very much.

We'll hear from, do we do?

Do we

do an admit or deny? All right. Mr. Anderson, do you admit violations or deny?

Yes, I admit the violation. We were ready to go. We started on it now, but I don't have it completed yet.

Gotcha. Okay.

So I've got a timeline here, which I can show you, you know, structured, I can show you pictures of the starting of what we've got. We've a whole bunch of set up to do. The building needs some work.

Got you. We're going do our first motion and then we'll have you back Thank up to you. I have a motion.

I move to find the restraint violation of the code as referred to the affidavit in this case.

Second.

All in favor? Aye. Opposed? Motion carries. Inspector Souda, you have the floor.

Vicki Souda, Code Compliance Inspector with the City of Clearwater. This is for property located at 1417 Cleveland Street, case number 4426. There is one violation here for code section three dash one five zero two b for exterior surfaces. The notice of violation was sent on 12/19/2025 with a compliance date of 01/19/2026. Certified mail receipt was received on 12/29/2025.

This is a picture of the property when I originally looked at it back in October. This was before the violation was sent out. I've got a call out to the property, and this is what it looked like at that time. These are pictures of the back of the property, the side, the very back. These pictures were taken in February.

And then these pictures were taken today. I did go back out there. Nothing has been done to the property. It's progressively getting worse. The grass was finally cut sometime over the last couple days.

This is the back of the property. Compliance can be met for the exterior surfaces by replacing any defective structural and decorative elements of any building wall and exterior surfaces are free of mildew, rust, loose material and faded peeling paint. Requesting compliance on or before 04/25/2026 are a fine of $150 per day for violation if compliance

is not met.

Thank you. Mr. Anderson?

Yes. I can get most of that done by April 25, right? And I'd like to see if it's possible to separate this concept. There's three sides of the building that are easily handled, The back is a mess. And I need a lot of prep work of that.

I mean, I've got I got twenty years poor maintenance, but we've only had the building a couple of years. So we're and we hadn't had the funds to do much work on it. Finally, I've got the place all filled up and I'm starting to get enough funds to be able to do a little bit of work on it. So I'm just the I can absolutely get by the April 25. I've got the timeline here.

So I can get the painting done for the first the east side, the front and the west side with the option with a condition that I'm not sure about murals. There's a city mural on the side of that building on the west side and I have to find out what the rules are about murals. Can't I don't think I can just paint over a mural that's been done. This one's been there like fifteen years. So if I can paint over it, I will.

If I can't paint over it, then we have to treat that separately. Then in the back, if I could just have more time to do that, because I've got three, four weeks of just wires and plumbing and I've got four different AC things there. I've moved ACs to the top from the back. And people before that had done that too. And they just put boards up and they did all sorts of stuff and got a bunch of stuff back there. So my point is that yes, I can do three sites by the April 25, but I need another thirty days to be able to do the rest.

So sixty days would you think would be enough to get the project fully completed? Yes. All right.

Make it May 27?

Whatever the It's a question for the secretary of department. May 27 for the next meeting? Well,

have a question for for this veteran, miss Suddath. How long has this case been going on with Vicky?

Well, I

started talking

to him

back in October about it. I didn't send a violation out right away because when we spoke, he told me that he was going through the grant program. Several conversations we had, he told me that it was in the process. But then when I spoke to he last week, she said that the paperwork had never been turned in. She had never received anything more from him. And then when I spoke to him at the code board last month, he told me that paperwork was turned in. But according to Vicki on Friday, nothing's been turned

in for him.

So it's been going on for about six months then. Okay.

Thank you.

I don't really think I think I told her I was in progress on that, the paperwork for that. But I never turned it in because I can never quite get the owner's agreement to do his part because that grant takes about 35%

or more

35 to 45% owner responsibility. Never quite got his agreement to do that. So now we're just doing this without trying to go through the grant program. So that delayed me from doing this because I was trying to push it through that because we wanted to do signage and we wanted to parking, wanted we to do several things, but I couldn't quite get the owner agreement on there. So now, we've now with this deadline coming up, I said we got to do something. And I finally got the agreement to do this. So that's been you know, the delay so far.

What happened with the grant program?

It's still there. You could do it. My owner just didn't want to do the steps necessary. He'd have to go get a loan. And I kept trying to go get that to happen. And it just didn't happen. So I had to opt when we come to the point where like, we've got to get the building done, because it's causing too many problems. So I we came up with this other solution. We're not doing the grant, just doing it all the time. Not doing all the signage, not doing all the parking, just get the painting done.

So the city is requesting compliance on it before April 25. Any discussion about that from the board in terms of additional time, we're sticking with that.

I'm okay to extend it to May 27, it feels like it can get it

done. Okay. Yeah.

So sixty days.

Mhmm.

Yeah. Okay. We're good. Ready? Yes,

sir. I moved in our order requiring the respondent to correct the violations on or before 05/27/2026. If the respondent does not comply by that date, the board may order a fine of $150 per day per violation for each day. Each violation continues to exist. If fines and fees remain unpaid three months after such lien is filed, the city is authorized to foreclose, collect or settle such lien.

May I have a second? Second. All in favor?

Aye. All

opposed? Opposed.

I oppose.

All right, motion carries. Thank you.

Thank you.

All right, next on our agenda is 310Case46Dash26, fine respondents affordable properties management Realty LLC, TRE at 1111 Court Street in violation of code for exterior surfaces and issue an order with compliance deadline and fine if compliance is not met. Inspector Souda, you have the floor. Is there anyone here to speak on this? Hello there. Sir, can you state your name and Michael Shimshoni. In front of the microphone, please, sir.

Michael Shimshoni. I reside at 4027

Wait this minute, sir.

Your address please?

Shimshoni, s h I m s h o n I.

Got it. Thank you.

It happens every time.

You.

I reside at 4027 32nd Street North in St. Petersburg. I'm a real estate broker with affordable realty. We manage the trust, we manage the property for the trust. And I would like to explain the, the nature of the violation.

Okay. Sir, we're gonna what we typically do is we're gonna hear from the inspector first, and then we'll have you come back up and and address this. No. Do you admit or deny the violation, sir? I'm sorry? Do you admit or deny the violation? I admit. All right. Thank you, sir. We'll call you back up. May I have a first motion, please?

I move to find the respondent violation of the code as referred to and affidavit in this case.

May I have

a second?

Second.

All in favor? Aye. All opposed? Motion carries. Inspector Suth, you have the floor.

Vicki Suth, the City of Clearwater code compliance inspector. This is for case number 42Dash26 for 1111 Court Street. There is two violations here, code section three dash one five zero two c one and c three for door and window maintenance and code section three dash one five zero two D for exterior surfaces. The notice of violation was sent on 12/12/2025 with a compliance date of 01/12/2026 and the certified mail receipt was received on 12/22/2025. This is a picture of the front of the building on December 10.

Again on January 29. And then again this morning. Compliance can be met for the doors and window by removing all boards and covering from all doors and windows. Ensure all doors and windows are in good repair, including window frames, sills, and panes. Compliance can be met for the exterior surfaces by replacing any defective structural and decorative elements of any building wall and ensure all exterior surfaces are free of mildew, rust, loose material, material, faded and peeling paint. We're requesting compliance on before 04/30/2026, or a fine of $150 per day per violation if the violation is, well, if compliance is not met,

sorry.

Thank you. Sir, tell us about this. Step in front of the microphone if you would. Thank you.

Well, since March, we've been working with some outfitted city of Clearwater that has grants and give grant money to redo the whole facade of the place. They gave us a list of items that they requested and we've been given everything they asked, we send them stuff and then it takes about another month and we get another thing. Anyway, the last thing they requested was insurance that we get to do the work just for the specific project. They said they have the money, the grant assigned for the project. But now the only hurdle was the insurance and we got the insurance.

It was a problem getting insurance because all the insurance companies would say, we'll give you the insurance after you take care of the situation. Well, how are going to take care of the situation if you get the insurance? So it was like back and forth. Look, the items of the wood, of the plywood, we can correct them fairly quick by April for sure we'll have them ready. The only thing we're going to do the job twice because we're going to do it once and then once we get the grant we got to remove the whole thing and we're to put a new glass front on the whole. So if there's no patients among the city to wait for the work to be done then we'll just go and do it and when we get the permit we'll do it again.

So

have you been awarded the grant based on providing insurance?

Well, no, no. The grant was given to us, granted to us based on the fact that they wanted to, I guess, to facelift the facade Of Court Street. There was some sort of And this wood was there since the hurricane, you know, put this to protect the the building. It was not meant to begin with to be, permanent but temporary, but apparently, this not, this has not been taken care of and we've been waiting for the city to well, like I said, they approved us. They gave us later.

They assigned us a certain number and they've been asking certain things. The only last item they requested, it took a little longer than anticipated was the insurance for the project itself. There's insurance on the building but there was no insurance on the construction. I think we got it resolved. You've never talked now.

And Have you talked to the city to see how fast you can proceed now?

No. We just sent this notice from the insurance about two weeks ago. We haven't gotten a response from the city. We'll probably it takes time. They don't respond quickly. It takes usually about a month from the time we send what they ask to the time they respond. So we got to work with their schedule. But like I said, if we realize the time is in the essence here and it's not gonna happen, then we'll do it either way. One of the two.

Sir, why did you wait, so long to contact your insurance company?

No, we contacted the insurance. They won't give us the insurance.

You said that you didn't contact them till two weeks ago.

No, two weeks ago we got the policy. We're able to get the policy. We just got it and we took we applied to many insurance company. They wouldn't take they wouldn't take

That's what I'm getting at. Why it took you so long to find insurance?

Because we couldn't find anyone. Finally, we were able to find someone. Okay. It's not that we didn't want. Our interest was, listen, there's there's money to be to fix the place up, not just to fix the wood, but do the whole facade. It's supposed to be glass front on the whole thing and with multiple, you know, it it will look really nice and I saw the plans. But the schedule of timing is not up to us. It's the city that's gonna approve it. They approve it,

but they have the funds to get

the money. And until we get the money from them, we can do their job. Like I said before, if it come to a point where we're gonna be in violations, we're gonna have stuff and get penalties, of course, we will do what we have to do. You know, we just change the wood, paint it, and get in compliance, which the building officials said being in compliance code is just the minimum. We don't want to be the minimum. We want to get it get nicer.

What is your

I'm sorry. It affects also our ability to rent a place. Sure. Okay.

What is your estimated timeline as far as being able to do it the way you want to get your grant and do the things that you want to About month. About a month?

Finish it up. The job itself shouldn't take more than a week. Does three weeks.

Four thirty is a month.

Also, I don't

know if there's

much to thirty five days, yeah. Okay.

All right. Any other questions from the board? Can we get a motion?

I move to enter an order requiring the respondent to correct the violations on or before 04/30/2026. If the respondent does not comply by that date, the board may order a fine of $150 per day per violation for each day. Each violation continues to exist. If fines and fees remain unpaid three months after such lien is filed, the city is authorized to foreclose, collect, or settle such lien.

Can I get a second? Second. Do you have a favor? Aye.

Yeah, go ahead.

Did you say April 30 or April 3?

Thirtieth. Thirtieth.

We just didn't hear it clearly.

Yeah, I

heard third. Thank you.

So the correct date is April 30. Thank you. May I have a all in favor?

Aye.

All opposed? Motion carries. Thank you, sir. Next case, 311, case 47Dash26, find respondents Northwest Properties LLC at 1235 Nicholson Street in violation of code for trailer parking and residential rental business tax receipt and issue an order with the compliance deadline and fine if compliance is not met. Is there anyone here to speak on that? Inspector Dixon, you have the floor.

Good afternoon, board. Inspector Dixon, code compliance inspector for the city of Clearwater. This is case 47Dash26 for 1235 Nicholson Street. There's two violations at this property. One violation code section three Dash14O782 for a travel trailer parked between the principal structure and right of way, and section three dash twenty three zero two for a life of residential rental business tax receipt.

Notice violations went out in November. I gave them about a month for the BTR and about three weeks to move the travel trailer off the property or behind the fence. But I did receive this certified mail in the office. The trailer out in the front yard on the date the notice was issued, and there's still a trailer in the front yard today. There was a BTR at the property in 2003 for something other than residential rental.

There's no BTR on file. Utilities are in David Valentine's name, and this is when he turned the utilities on when they were asking for to turn the utilities on, so it's a rental. Compliance to the unit for the travel trailer. By removing the travel trailer from the front of the property, the trailer can be placed in the back or side yard provided with the screened by six foot high hedge fence or wall, and it must also be parked on approved surface. And for the lack of business tax receipt, you can apply and obtain a business tax receipt for the rental.

Some request compliance on or before May 1 and request a fine of a $150 per day for the travel trailer violation and a fine of $50 a day for the BTR. I am in contact with the owner. This the the renters are giving the owner trouble. He says he's gonna evict them, but and he's gonna improve,

so here we are.

Excellent. Any questions from the board? I believe that would be two separate motions, one for the VTR and one for the other violation. See a legal counsel's nodding his head. So can I get a motion on the, VTR please?

I move to find the respondent in violation of the code as referred to in the affidavit in this case.

Second. Second. All in favor? Aye. Opposed? Motion carries. Can I get a second motion, please?

I move to enter an order requiring the respondent to correct the violation on or before 05/01/2026. If the respondent does not comply by that date, the board may order a fine of $150 per day.

This is for the VTR, so that would be $50 per day.

Yeah. I'm just doing the travel trailer.

That's okay.

Doing the travel trailer first.

There you go. Okay.

Was in order. Very good. Thank you. Thank you.

Yes. 150 I'm going to start that over.

Okay.

If the respondent does not comply by that date, the board may order a fine of $150 per day per violation for each day. Each violation continues to exist. If fines and fees remain unpaid three months after such lien is filed, the city is authorized to foreclose, collect, or settle such lien.

May I have a second? Second. All right. All in favor? Aye. Opposed? Motion carries. Can I get a motion on the, we need to do a first motion on the second violation as well?

I'm thinking we did it.

Separate, right?

Yeah, I would separate would be appropriate.

Second violation of the business tax receipt. May I get a first motion, please?

Move I to find the respondent in violation of the code as referred to in the affidavit in this case. Second.

Second. All in favor. Aye. All opposed? Motion carries. I have a second motion.

I move to enter an order requiring the respondent to correct the violations on or before 05/01/2026. If the respondent does not comply by that date, the board may order a fine of $50 $50 per day per violation for each day. Each violation continues to exist. If fines and fees remain unpaid three months after such lien is filed, the city is authorized to foreclose, collect or settle such lien.

May I have a second? Second. All in favor? Aye. All opposed? Motion carries.

Thank you, board.

Thank you, inspector. Our next case is 313Case49Dash26, fine respondents Good Shepherd Boulevard, LLC at 1746 Drew Street in violation of code for exterior storage and issue an order with the compliance deadline and fine if compliance is not met. Is there anywhere here to speak on that? Yep. Yes. Sir, can you step forward to the microphone and share your name and address with us?

Alfie Solomons, 17

When you got?

No. I

am representative, the owner of the property.

That's okay. Just need to

swear you in. Yeah.

Do you swear to affirm to tell the truth throughout your

entire testimony?

Yeah. Thank

Thank you.

All right.

Up to the microphone a little bit. Thank you.

Thank you. For its first time.

Alright. That's okay.

Sir, do you admit or deny the violation?

Yeah.

You admit the violation? Do you admit or deny

the violation? Deny. We cleared it already.

All right. Sir, if you care to have a step back, we'll hear from the inspector.

All right. Good afternoon, board.

I'm

McKazy, code enforcement inspector for the city of Clearwater. This is case number 49Dash26For1746DrewStreet. There's one violation here for code section three Dash 15 on 2 f one and f two for exterior storage. This is the date notice violation was sent out. Compliance date we did get the certified mail receipt back. And I have been in contact with the owner. Maybe there was some miscommunication over the past week or so, but you'll see with the photos. Back in November, we went out to this property. You might remember this one. They had the hauling trailer running as a food truck that was hooked up to the plumbing and electric out front. Mhmm. That was taken care of. But if you remember from those other photos, there were some items being stored outdoors in the rear of the property.

So there was a

picker for an engine, some glass. There was much barrels, buckets, all sorts of items. You can see the old ductwork for the building.

Hold on there. It's chucking a bit.

There There were some kitchen equipment being stored outdoors. Let's see

if it'll work from here.

She's hurt. So if these are not clear enough, let me know, but it looks like the power point's struggling a little bit. There's kitchen equipment being stored outdoors. I went back after the compliance date. This was in January.

After the compliance date, similar items were still out. Believe this time I hadn't been in contact with the owner yet, but after this date, we did get in contact and the property was cleaned up. But when I went back the other day on the or just today, this morning, the twenty fifth, lot of the bakery equipment was then again being stored outdoors. There's a bunch of pipes from the plumbing that was ripped up or being stored underneath the black truck in the rear. And then there's a few items around the dumpster like a old bucket, old large rain bucket, and a pallet. I'm sorry. Those are small. Let's see if this. Sorry. Still not catching up.

So I did try calling the owner again. I left a message to say, hey, we just need to clean up these few items, but we're still not completely there. So compliance being met for the exterior storage by removing from the grounds of the property, all items not met for outdoor use, and ensuring all items meant to be thrown out are placed inside the dumpster. And requesting compliance signed before 04/25/2026, with a fine of $150 per day for violation for each day the violations continue to exist.

Questions? Do have any questions? And the pictures you showed us, they were smaller, and I couldn't quite make out the date. You showed us pictures from today showing noncompliance. Noncompliance.

I'll try it, see if it'll load in. So it looks like they're doing good now. This is the same bakery equipment that I've asked to be put inside before. It was inside, and then it made its way back outside. I believe there's a bed bread racks because it's a bakery

in there.

Yeah. Yeah. And I'm seeing a date of 03/25 on that.

Yeah. That was a that was

that more.

And these are the pipes. I asked them before to please remove these from the grounds of property, not store

them underneath the truck.

And then anything around the dumpster has to make its way into the dumpster. You can't just be storing items around the dumpster. So that's where it was asking. There's a little bit left to do, but it's definitely improvement from what it

was. Okay.

And your compliance date is 04/25. Right?

Yes. Not just giving them another month to come down. Yes.

Good. Alright.

Anybody else?

Can I get a

The picture say it all?

What's that?

The pictures say it all.

Yeah, exactly.

Do you want to speak Yes, with the please.

What can you tell us about this? What are we going to do

about this?

It's just the owner. He's out of state right now, and this is rented properties. So they maybe know that he's out of state because of this, they are doing that. But before, a couple days ago, I went my son, I go there and check it. There was nothing like that before. So it's maybe they do it because he is not here right now. He will be here next week.

Okay.