Code Enforcement Board - Regular Meeting

Alright. I'm the other.

And I hereby call this meeting to order. This is the code enforcement for the city of Delray Beach. Cases will be heard in the order in which they appear on the agenda.

When you hear

your case called, go ahead and proceed to the podium on my left hand side. The city will present its testimony and evidence first. You'll have an opportunity to review the testimony or to review any evidence the city presents and ask questions of any of the city's witnesses. After which time, you can present your own testimony and evidence, and then I will make a decision. This is a quasi judicial hearing which means the formal rules of evidence do not apply here. However, all testimony is taken under oath under penalty of perjury. So if you're going to testify today or you think you might testify or there's a possibility that you might testify, I'd ask that you rise, raise your right hand so that you can be sworn in.

By the authority in me as a notary of the state of Florida, do you swear or affirm that the testimony you are about to give is the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth?

Absolutely. Yes.

Thank you.

Alright. So they can call their first case.

Did you want to go over the minutes?

Did you want

Oh, yep. I should probably have done that.

Request for the postpone if we did.

Alright. For the record, I have the minutes of ten 01:25 and 10:15 twenty five, and they're hereby approved. Any changes to the agenda?

Yes. We have, code case 25000272, And also code 25000329. And finally code case 25000346. These cases are postponed. Yes.

We're asking the special magistrate to postpone the cases. Thank you.

And also

Wait. Hold on one second. Has to order.

Without objection, they are hereby postponed.

Thank you. Thank you.

In addition, code cases that are closed or came into compliance. We have code 25000229, code 25000338, and finally, 25000372. Okay.

City of color first. Case.

K. So case one is code 25000269. The owner is Dominique m Rice and Gary h Rice. Property address is 1230 South Ocean Boulevard, and the case will be presented by Enrique Hernandez.

Thank you. So we're actually gonna start with miss Alvarez and whose department referred this over to the code enforcement department. Proceed. Good afternoon.

Good afternoon.

Could you please state your full name and spell your last name for the record?

Amy Alvarez, a l v a r e z.

And what capacity are you employed with for the city?

I'm the assistant development services director. And

in your position, do you sometimes get notified if there are any issues with other departments such as the Florida Department and then die emergency protection? Yes. And in your department, was your department or somehow notified that there was an issue with the property located at 1230 Southeast South Ocean Boulevard? Yes. And was that it relates to an easement? Yes. Okay. And and based on the correspondence that your department received, what was the issue?

An attorney representing Banyan House Condominium, which is across the street from 10:30 or I'm sorry. What's the 1230. 1230 And 1260 South Ocean Boulevard. The attorney called me, mentioned that they had received a letter from FDP requesting clearance of an easement that, was across the street because that easement, well, FDP need FDP needed access to the affluent well, to the easement area to make sure that the affluent outfall was properly, I guess Cleared. Cleared. Thank you. And and so yes. Okay.

So because the easement was, would call, maybe obstructed Mhmm. By items or vegetation, FDP could not get through to review what needs to be reviewed for for the manuscript.

Right. Okay. And

based on this, did you take a look at the property to see or or the documents that you received via public record within the city to confirm whether an easement indeed existed?

Yes. I looked at the plats for both both properties. They've they were separately platted.

But yes. And within your normal course in scope of business with the city, do you, from time to time, look at the Palm Beach County official records to pull easement records or plat records? Frequently. And then in this particular case, I believe you just stated that you reviewed is that what you reviewed Mhmm. To look at the plat to see if there were any easements there?

Correct. Okay.

And

did you also kinda take a look at any photos or anything to see what the outside of the parkway will not take photos, but review

Right. I I files

into the city records.

Yes. I I looked at street Google Street View, and then also the attorney that had contacted me, she sent me

a few photos as well. Okay. And I'm now showing you guys were previously marked as city's exhibit one for identification purposes. Do you recognize this? Is this the Google image of the property kind of in between 12/30 and December?

I believe so.

Okay. And is this a fair and accurate representation of one of the items that you kind of took a look at or reviewed within the city's files or records and then what you just stated?

Mhmm. So you

kinda get a street view of the property. Correct. Okay. Cities exhibit two. Do you recognize this? Yes. And is this the the plat for the property that you said you reviewed?

That's well, it's a it's a survey of one of properties, and it looks like the portion of the easement area this is probably 1230 or 12 I don't know. The property to the north. But

it looks like

the highlighted area is where the easement is.

Okay. So believe we're here for the 1230. So this is in reference to the survey for the 1230 property, which indicates the easement. Correct?

It's whichever property is to the north. Don't recall which one is 1230 and

which one

is 1260.

But this is a an accurate representation of the the whatever survey you looked at Mhmm.

To make determinations. I've seen those. Mhmm. Okay.

Thank you. City's exhibit three for identification purposes. Do you recognize this? Yes. And what do you recognize this to be?

So that's a plat from 2020. And the two lots to the south, I believe it says Lot 1 and Lot 2, they were already previously a a single parcel that actually provided parking for the Banyan Hills condominium across the street. But in 2020, they were replatted into two individual lots. Okay.

And I'm now showing you the same exhibit a little closer as the Mhmm. Exhibit three, just the highlight, clean clean version. So you said there's Lot 1 Mhmm. And Lot 2. And is that the going back, you said the lot to the north. Which lot is to

the north? So the one the lot that's titled or addressed is 1230. That's the lot to the north, and that lot was already there. It was it was platted in '19, I believe, 1951, and that's when the easement just to the south of it between 1230 and 12:60 was originally recorded. Okay.

Yeah. So now I'm also showing you we're actually gonna title this as city's exhibit exhibit four. Mhmm. And I'm showing you if it has been marked as city's exhibit four for identification purposes. Do you recognize this? Yes. And what is this?

So that's the Delray Beach Shores Platte. And I believe that that's the one that I was referring to from 1951, and that is when '12 I believe it's 12/30 was originally platted. And so that shows the original recordation of the easement between the two properties. Okay.

So this is the record and and was this obtained

from the official records

of Palm

Beach County?

The clerk of court's website. Yes.

Which is a public entity?

Mhmm. Okay.

I just

wanted to

show you the show. Oh,

I'm gonna get back to the financial. Thanks. At this time,

Is this gentleman representing the respondent?

This is the homeowner responding. Sorry. If you yes. He would like you to come here and state your name and your address for the record.

I'm Certainly. Gary Rice. Our address is 1230 South Ocean Boulevard, Delray Beach 33483.

And sir, you're the property owner in question?

Yes,

sir. Do you have any objections to the documents the city would like to submit into evidence?

I it's well above my pay grade needless to say. However, we have actual photos.

Sir, I I promise I'll let you present to me whatever you want, but right now it's the city's case, so I just need to know whether you object to the things that they presented to me.

Oh, yes. I don't think we should be liable.

That's not I'm what deciding.

Okay. I told you it's above my

pay deciding I'm just deciding whether or not to admit the documents into evidence.

I have the documents. Yes.

Alright. I Before

the record, I know he said that this is above his pay grade. Did have a conversation with mister Rice prior to the hearing. He initially did seek counsel. Counsel and Based on his and he can tell you and confirm this or not But he did discuss this with his counsel and they were comfortable with him coming and representing himself So I just wanted to put that on the record. Okay.

For the record, I'm gonna accept the exhibits one through four into evidence Okay. Okay. I'm gonna let the city finish presenting their case, and then you can tell me anything you'd like me to know.

Okay? Thank you so much.

Yeah. Okay.

Can I sit?

Yes. You can sit, sir. Yeah. So for purposes of the exhibit three, we've highlighted the easement on record. And what are the parameters or how far does the easement extend on each property? Is it five feet each way?

Yeah. The the the depth of the Eastman is five feet into each each property along the property line dividing them. And once

you conducted your research, reviewed the documentation sent by the Florida Department of Environmental Protection to the Banyan House that was provided to you, reviewed the official records and all that. Did you send this over to the code enforcement department to determine if a code and code violation was warranted for this issue? Yes. Okay. Thank you. That's all I have for you now, miss Alvarez. At this time, the city oh, actually, I don't know if mister Rice has any questions for the witness before we proceed to the next witness.

Mister Rice, do you have any questions for the witness?

I wouldn't even know what I'm talking about.

I'm gonna take that as a no.

Okay. At this time, the city would like to call mister Enrique Fernandez. Good afternoon, mister Fernandez. Just before you proceed with your with your script, I just wanted to confirm that this this was provided to you from the development services department for review as to whether a code enforcement violation was warranted?

Yes. It was.

Okay. You may proceed.

Good afternoon. My sister's dream.

Did you wanna go to the microphone? Mhmm. Just because I know we're on record. Thank you.

Good afternoon. My name is Enrique Fernandez, calling enforcement administrator for the city of Delray Beach. On October on 08/14/2024, after receiving the email from development services, I inspected a property at 1230 South Ocean Boulevard, where I observed in the picture from the street, I saw trees and vegetation that I couldn't identify what the easement was. So I made contact with mister Rice, property owner of 1230 South Ocean Boulevard. He gave me access to the property.

We're moving to the backyard where I would serve a fence that divided the two properties, one on 1260 South Ocean Boulevard and 1230 South Ocean Boulevard. So on May 27, excuse me, we did not issue a notice of election at the time because I was informed that it was going through a legal review. So the c attorney told me the c attorney assistant told me to hold down on the violation. So

Okay. We can proceed forward to your review and determination of a code violation.

Yes. So after that we were instructed on May 27, I met with mister Rice at the property at the property to provide him with a document that was given to me to provide to him that it was the Benning House Whole Harmless Agreement.

Okay. We we don't want we don't want to talk about any of those types of settlement discussions. We just want to get to the violation. Okay.

So on September 26, a special master's denoted was issued to the property, Ocean Boulevard, for the violation of code section 100.01 subsection a subsection one, which is existing of which trash and vegetation upon lands is prohibited, and also for court section 100.01 subsection c, which is also mentions the existing waste, trash, and vegetation upon lands is prohibited. So the special magistrate hearing noise was male, first class and certified male on on October 2 and also posted on city hall. K? So if it is, I only took a picture of my last inspection, which is gonna be exhibit

Five.

Five.

Okay. Took the picture again. I'm sorry. This is exhibit four.

It's exhibit five.

Yeah. I'm sorry. Exhibit five. This is a picture that depicts on August 14 when mister Rice gave me access to his property and this is a fence that is located in between the two properties.

Okay. And then the easement is where the vegetation, all of this, the fence and the vegetation is is within the easement, correct? Based on your review of the files and your communications with the development services? Correct. Okay. So all of this vegetation and is mister Rice's property on the left side? It like, where you're standing?

Yes. It's to the left side of the property. Yes. In the front going to the front will be South Ocean Boulevard A 1 A.

Okay. And this vegetation, all the greenery, and all of that is within the easement? Correct. Okay. And did you also take a look at these other exhibits, this photograph, the plat, the the recorded documents?

Yes. I did.

Okay. At this time, the city would like to introduce city's exhibit five into evidence. Oh. I'm gonna I'm so sorry. City's exhibit six. We have one more. City's exhibit six.

Yes. This is my inspection prior to hearing on 11/03/2025. Once again, I did not have access to the property at this time, but this is from the public right away, Salvation Boulevard, where it still depicts that there is vegetation in front of the easement.

Okay. So just to be clear, because this is this is one is this a picture of 1230 solely or is this a picture depicting 1230 on one side and 1260 on one side?

It's both properties. 1230 is looking at the picture, it's gonna be in the right side. It's 1230 South Ocean Boulevard. On the left side is gonna be 1260 South Ocean Boulevard.

And there's a yellow line. Is that kind of where the property splits behind that pole or no?

There is construction going in the area so we don't know who draw this line we could not determine if it is a division or not

but based on your view of the case and your review of the official records and being on property on-site the vegetation is in the easement. Is that correct? Correct. Alright. At this time, the city would like to introduce city's exhibits five and six into evidence. So admit. And just for the record, I I just wanted to sure that we introduce a clean copy of exhibit because we have kind of some demonstrative cop's notes in highlighting. I just wanted to introduce a clean copy of city's exhibit three into evidence.

So admit it. So just so I understand, because this sort of went in a few different directions. What the city's alleging is a violation here is that there's an easement between the two properties, and inside that ment is a fence and vegetation that the city believes can't be there under the code. Is that essentially what you're arguing? Yes.

Yes. Just to be clear, I believe and mister Nunes, and correct me if I'm wrong, the defense relates to December. Is that

I don't know who the where the fence belongs to. Okay. But I was informed that it's in the on the in the east

So the code section you cited refers to vegetation. Is that what you're concerned about?

Yes. It's vegetation.

So compliance in this case would be the removal of the vegetation that is in the easement? Correct. Alright. Think I understand. Is there anything further?

Not at this time, I believe. No. Not not at this time. No.

Mister Rice, come on up. It's your turn. So the city tells me that that there's an easement here and you have stuff in the easement and they think that's a violation. And you say what?

I I would like to say that mister Fernandez has been nothing but a courtesy, professional, and we appreciated his his manner in which he approached situation.

That's good to hear.

The only thing and please, this is a very emotional thing for me because my wife has worked like a Trojan to do what was right and what happened when the builder was granted access to what is now known as 1260, which was a parking lot.

Okay.

There was my wife has always taken photos of our homes and everything which I have, which I think is germane because the property when we purchased the property, had pine trees separating the parking lot from us. And there was a fence on the property that marked the demarcation between the two properties. When this project was approved by the city, they invited us to look at the situation virtually, and I asked if I could meet with the builder, who was kind enough to allow him his time to meet with me. He then stated that the pine trees, even

though

they were for the most part on our property, he was going to cut the roots on 1260 Property, therefore destroying the pine trees, which I have photos of, if I may show you.

Please show them to the city attorney first, please.

I'm sorry?

You need to show them to the city attorney first.

I hope this doesn't bore you too much. My wife, she's very, very succinct with these things. Let me make sure I've got the book right. This was this was the property before the builder came in.

The property behind yours?

This is the this is our fence

Okay. That

we had. There's the pine trees I'm talking about. He came in and took out all the pine trees, including our fence, I might add. And this is what we inherited.

Here. Let's see. We got

down that and this is his dirt.

Okay.

His this this lot was, like, three to four feet below sea level. In fact, when there was a high tide, we got to watch the fish in the parking lot.

Okay. So He

he had to put in an unbelievable amount of fill as you can see here. I should I could've brought samples. By the way, not that it's germane. We went to we have a lawsuit against the builder, and we met with settlement two weeks ago.

It's it's way beyond the scope of

this hearing. Mean, I I here here.

Well, I Miss Warren, if I could this is a the easement is the FDEP's easement. Right? I

understand, sir.

Hold on one second. Let me let me ask the city attorney here because I it's it's not the city's easement. Right?

Well, believe it's an easement for for public use. So even though I got to go back to double check that, but I thought that's what it was for. Utility use.

Why not just let the FTP enforce its own easement?

Right. So

the if you look at I believe it's exhibit three. I provided you with a copy of it.

Yeah. I'm looking.

That you know, where we and we'll go up here. You can kinda see it where we have highlighted where the easement is. If you look in the first column to the left, under the dedication section, just before where it says the December 23, there's language in there that says the drainage easement as shown hereon is hereby reserved for the owner of Lot 2, the successors and assignees, and for drainage purposes, And in the maintenance obligation of the owners, lot two, their successor and assignees without recourse to the city of Dartmouth Beach. So this is also a drainage easement that

So what you're easement too. Alright. So why am I concerned about the palm trees, mister Rice?

The pine trees were the buffer between the two properties, sir. And when the builder came in told us that he was going to remove those roots and kill that pine trees, he agreed to replace them with other foliage that we had agreed to. I'm not disputing the easement at all. That's not my that's not my point. My point is that the builder came in fully knowing about the easement, and by the way, the actual pipe is not on our property.

The actual pipe is on twelve sixty's property, not on our property. The fence is what the builder put in after Unless

I misunderstand, the city's not arguing about the fence today. They're arguing about the vegetation that's in the easement.

The vegetate our veg our vegetation is on our side of the of the fence that we've replaced at a cost of $30,000 after the building destroyed it. Now I understand that's not the issue. However, I think there's situations that the city should have been aware of because we called the city two, three times and they never mentioned anything except the fact that the city was not responsible for anything. That I understand. The thing I'm I'm saying is that

Mister Reiss, I I know you're not a lawyer, so let me see if I can help you by clarifying what my role is. I'm not a judge, and I don't hear all aspects of a case. I'm a special magistrate for the purposes of code enforcement, so my role is actually pretty limited. My job is to listen to the evidence and read the code sections and decide whether the evidence presented violates constitutes a violation of the code section. If it does, I enter a corrective order. If it doesn't, I dismiss the case. And so for me, the only real issue here is has the city presented facts that establish that a violation has occurred? I really can't get into the other stuff. I certainly can't get into the whatever dispute you have with with the builder. Right?

Because I it's just I'm not a judge. It's just well beyond. So for in this particular case, my understanding is what the city is alleging is that they they own an easement, which I think is indisputable based upon the documents they've given me. Right. And they're saying you got stuff in their easement, and they don't want it there.

The easement being five feet from

the Both sides. Yep.

Right. Miss Warren, did did I correctly characterize what you're arguing?

Is correct. Than I could've. Okay.

So the the defense that you have to present is either that the easement is not valid, which I think would be a hard one since it seems to be pretty clearly valid, or that you don't have stuff in their easement, or that the stuff that you have in the easement is allowed. That would be a defense, but, you know, the the builder did you wrong. I don't disagree with you. Maybe they did. It's it's not a defense here. Do you understand?

No. I understand. Thank you. Yeah. Defense is not our offense, however.

They're not arguing about the fence. They're just saying the vegetation. Alright. So I suspect that, you know I I don't know this, but my suspicion is there may be another case against somebody else that has something to do with the fence. I don't know. But in your case, for your property, what they're alleging is that the vegetation that you have that's aligning that fence is in their easement, and it's preventing them from the use of their easement.

I understand that had the city made it made us aware, we certainly wouldn't have gone to the expense of the trouble of allowing him to cut down the pine. I understand your position quite clearly. However,

we It sounds like you have a pretty good legal dispute with somebody. Not that I give legal advice.

Am right. I will tell you this. The city got conned in a sense that the builder declared bankruptcy, never paid his subs.

So I I don't know about that but I did wanna make one clarification. I feel We talked about it, you know, the city is the the plat's for the use but it's technically is not DEP. I just wanna make sure it's clear, it's for the use of the owners of the plat without regard to the use of the city as I stated earlier. So I just wanted to put that on the record. But I I think you you well summed up where we are with the argument. I I don't know what other side dispute he has with the builder or that, but we're just here for purposes of this violation.

Is the city asking for here?

So we're asking for the property owner to remove the vegetation from the drainage easement or pay within fourteen days or pay a fine of 200 doll $250 daily until compliance is achieved.

Mister Rice, what the city is asking me to do is give you fourteen days to remove the vegetation from the easement. Fourteen days is a small amount of time. I'm willing to give you a large amount of time. What I can't do is I can't let you continue to put stuff in the easement.

Alright. I understand the the easement situation quite clearly. You explained that perfectly to me. However, if there's not a problem with that drainage pipe pipe, why would we have to remove something that's not necessary at this point?

I I I I can't speak to what is necessary for proper drainage. That's well beyond my scope, but they're entitled to have the easement as it's written written here, clear of debris, trash, vegetation, and other things. That's that's what their

pipe is at least three feet from that fence, by the way. Not five feet. I understand five feet, but at least three feet on their property from our property.

It is I

mean I mean, fundamentally, what you're asking is for the city to give up some of the rights that it has. No. And and the city may well want to do that, and they may choose to do that. They may negotiate to do that. But for me, that's pretty simple. It's whether or not, you know, whether or not they have the easement I'm not wasting any

of your time.

You're not you're not you're not wasting my time.

I appreciate that. However, I am not about to remove something that or may not be a problem for the city. If it is a problem for the city, I understand it's my responsibility. The city then will tear down 12 sixties fence that belongs to them. And they, of course, we will then have to tear down all that.

Miss Warren, you said that he had an attorney at some point?

I did. I did. And his attorney

did he is there a legal argument of some kind that that mister Rice can't doesn't understand how to make?

Because I haven't heard the defense. I don't based off what he's stating, it sounds more of an equitable, it's not fair. I want to keep my trees unless there is a pending issue where they need to access the easement, but that's not how the easements work. Easement is you need to be able to access the easement It's a property right so so that you know I don't I don't specifically see I I recall from the language of the the email from the attorney He felt like his client could well and capably handle this matter on his own and say that he would not be here.

Mister Reza, honestly, I wish you had brought your attorney.

Well, I can arrange to that then. That's that's what it takes to the only the only thing I'll say is why would the city have not stated that when that fence went up, that fence shouldn't have been put up in the first place. I mean, that was just done upon the completion of the twelve sixty. We certainly wouldn't have gone to the expense of the trouble of putting in all that vegetation on our side of the fence had this matter been brought up properly at that time.

And we can and, you know, we're I don't wanna discuss other matters with other property owners at this time. We just like to stay to the 12:30 issue.

Do you have a copy of the ordinances in question? Because they're not in my book.

The ordinance? Do you have it? If not, I could

Sorry. Yeah.

Thank you. I could pull it up. It's highlighted if that's okay with you. I'm sorry, mister

It's fine.

No. But this this isn't the official he wants the official ordinance.

I just wanna make sure I'm okay.

It's not

the whole code section. It's just for purposes

of this. Whatever portion that you're relying on. Can

you talk about the agreement? No. One one moment. Can we take a brief recess? I believe mister Rice wanted to tell me something. Okay. If you wouldn't mind.

Just a I don't mind.

Let's take five.

If we can go off the record. So what we're requesting at this time, I've spoken we're back on the record. Correct?

We are.

Luan Warren for the city of Daughter Beach. I have spoken to mister Rice during the recess, and it It appears as if he wants to further discuss this with his attorney this matter Separately with the Banyan house. So what we're willing to do is based on His assertion and discussing with staff. We're willing to see if you will agree to a thirty day postponement so that Mr. Rice would have the opportunity or to do a either I don't want to postpone the hearing.

Maybe if we could do a a thirty day if you can make a finding and

sense at this point. Mister Rice, what I'm inclined to do here is to make a finding that a a violation of at least 100.01 c exists, which is the infringement upon the city's utility right away. What I what I won't do is I won't assess a fine at this time. What I'll just do is I will reset this for a hearing in thirty days for fine assessment if necessary, and that'll give you and the city a month to figure out if there's a way you can resolve this without me having to find anybody. Okay?

I appreciate that.

Alright. So in case

excuse me. You the

Wait. He's going to he has to do the the order.

Yeah. I have to do the order. In case code 25000269 to make the following findings of fact on life on notice is sufficient. I find the property in violation of code section 100.1 c. I give the respondent thirty days to bring the property to compliance. In the absence of compliance, a fine may be issued, but I withhold on that at this time except for fine assessment hearing after thirty days. Thank you. I

understand. So that's something we can we can work out with

your lawyer.

Sorry. I thought you might have to write that one up different.

You need to go to the this

is called. Alright. Wanna call the next one?

Case number two, Code25

Just give me

one second.

000121. Owner's name, Christopher W. Property address, 126 Sea Breeze Avenue. And the case will presented by code officer Latoya Thompson.

Good afternoon, special magistrate. I'm code officer Latoya Thompson with the city of Delray Beach. I'm here for a noncompliance case regarding a nonpayment of a fine.

Hold on. Right before you, is there anyone here on behalf of this case? Okay. Go ahead. I'm sorry.

This case was originally found to be irreparable irreversible violation on 07/28/2025 for erosion and sediment control methods. On 08/08/2025, the ruling was a onetime fine in the amount of 3,500 to be paid within thirty days or a lien will be placed on the property. On 09/23/2005, a magistrate order inspection was conducted, and it was observed that the fine was not paid. On 09/24/2025, I posted the property. On the same day, a non a notice of noncompliance was male, first class certified male, and posted in city hall.

As of today, which is 11/05/2025, the fine remains outstanding. I have one new photo to introduce as evidence and four previously shown photos from the initial hearing.

Thank you. So these are the previously shown photos that you discussed, miss Thompson? Yes, ma'am. Alright. So now I'm I'm showing you as my previously marked notice, exhibit one for identification purposes. Do you recognize this? Yes, ma'am. And what is it?

That's the hearing notice.

Alright. And that's a fair and accurate representation of what was posted on the property?

Yes, ma'am.

At this time, the city would like to introduce city's exhibit one into evidence.

Without objection, so admitted.

Thank you. So what is the recommendation you have, miss Thompson?

That the property be lien for the amount of 3,500.

For failure to pay the fine in time. Correct?

Yes, ma'am.

Thank you. And just to double just to make sure, please confirm that you checked all city records and confirmed that the fine has not been paid.

I checked all city records and confirmed that the fine has not been paid.

Thank

you. Officer Thompson, if you have any communication with the respondent on this matter?

I spoke to the contractor who was here for the initial case and Thank you, sir. We gave him everything everything that he needed to pay. He did say that he didn't wanna pay. He felt like it was unfair. We still just issued what he need to pay. And as of today, it's still out of compliance. Well, still not paid.

Alright. Based upon the facts and evidence presented to me, I hereby assess a lien in the amount of $3,500 on the property and property owner. I think that's it. Right? Yeah.