Code Enforcement/ Magistrate - Special Meeting

Order at 2PM, 02/12/2026. First order of business, the approval of minutes. I approve the 01/08/2026 minutes. Good afternoon. Welcome to the City of Edgewater Code Enforcement Hearing.

My name is Ryan Knight, and I am the special magistrate for the City Of Edgewater. These hearings are open to the public under Florida's government and the Sunshine Law. The procedures of this hearing are that due process is emphasized to each respondent and to the city in accordance with Florida Statute Section 162.07, subsection three, which states formal evidence shall not apply, but fundamental due process shall be observed and shall govern the proceedings. Hearsay is admissible, but only to support other competent substantial evidence. Any decision made today may be appealed by sending notice of appeal to the circuit court within thirty days of the execution of any order.

The City of Edgewater will present its case first as it has a burden of proof. Afterwards, the respondents will have an opportunity to respond. At this time, please silence all cell phones. If you will be providing any testimony today, please stand up and raise your right hand. Do you swear or affirm that the testimony you're about to give today shall be the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth?

Think we're going to go a little bit out of order since we do have some people present. The first case that we'll call is case 20Five-one22929AB.

Good afternoon. Officer Haywood, City of Edgewater Code Enforcement. Bruce and Diane Crew are the owners of the property located at 1303 Victory Palm Drive in Edgewater, Florida. It's been found in violation of section ten five sub one four outdoor storage and debris. Section ten one twenty one trailer storage of the city of Edgewater's code of ordinances.

On 10/07/2025, I was directed to list location reference to an extreme amount of outdoor storage and parking violations. I arrived and observed two trailers stored in the city right away. On the rear of the property, I observed homemade type racks with items stored above the fence line height, which could be observed from neighboring properties. The driveway contained an extreme amount of different types of items, tools, and such. The front yard had a tarp with the vehicle parked under it, a broken, dilapidated fence showing the storage items, and a makeshift shed.

Notice of violation was prepared and handed to a female who identified herself as Missy. Violations were explained to her in how to correct them. Missy understood and stated she's been waiting for a long time to get this cleaned up. The notice of violation had a correction date of 10/21/2025 with the following violations observed, outdoor storage and debris, trailer storage, nuisance generally, accessory structure, and canopies, and temporary air carports. Due to the amount of violations observed on the property, four extensions were asked for and given to the property owner, Diane Crew, as long as work continued, to progress the situation there.

01/05/2026, an inspection was conducted after nearly three months of extensions. The items stored in the driveway were still present. One trailer was still stored in the city right away, and the storage racks were still observed from the neighboring properties. Citation number 0552, notice of hearing was subsequently issued, handed to a male on scene. It was posted since certified mail to the owner and posted at city hall.

All notices and provisions of chapter 10 article 27 have been complied with. Staff recommends the special magistrate find Bruce and Diane Crew in violation of section 10 dash five sub one four outdoor storage and debris in section 10 dash one twenty one trailer storage of the code ordinances and assess the citation fine of $75 per violation totaling $150. The trailer storage violation has been corrected, and the only daily fines being requested is for the outdoor storage and debris in the amount of $100 a day daily if not corrected by 02/22/2026.

Thank you. Is there anybody here for the respondent? Ma'am, can you please come to the podium and state your name and address?

My name is Diane Crew. I'm here for 1303 Victory Palm in Edgewater.

Okay.

Okay. I own the property. And I just want to say a few things that I hope will help. Scott does not make enough money to have a storage unit, number one. He has to keep his things at the house as he's self employed and uses and reuses all of the materials that he keeps in the yard.

As for being above the fence line due to the small yard, he does, in my estimation, an excellent job of keeping the materials, stacking them for future use. He did try to build a little thing on the far side where it came above the neighbor's fence line to make it look like it was a building rather than just the stuff that was there. And I don't want to be accusing, but if someone did report him for this, I'm sorry that it just shows no empathy for a working man who puts his whole self into what he does. He doesn't have any help from anyone. He does everything himself.

If you're asking him to completely beautify the yard to someone else's standards, it really is asking too much. He could move the trailers, which he has done. One of them is at my house. Though I don't know where he's going to park them permanently, he uses them and he maintains the grass in that area so that the city tractors don't have to ask him to move or anything. Hope you can see that as a positive.

And until the recent frost, he was trying to beautify part of the yard with the nice trees that he had there. Now they look like horrible. We don't live in an HOA, but I do appreciate the city's trying to keep up the looks of the area. To an end, I would ask some consideration for people who have to live in their homes as best they can. He's not being destructive. Please show some leniency and allow him to live and work in his yard.

I do realize that, ma'am, but the city code does say what it says, especially with regard to junk and debris in the yard. And from the photos that I've reviewed, that's what it appears to be.

He uses that stuff in the yard all the time. If he has to put that away at the end of every day, I don't even know where he would put it.

Problem is it can't be out in the open. It affects neighboring property values, the health and general safety of the neighboring properties. When you have junk out there, you get rats and other rodents in there that go to other units and other properties. So I do have to rule based upon what the city code says. Is there anything else that you would like to offer?

No. I'd like to have some suggestions what to do with it.

Well, he's either going to have to put it behind a fence where nobody can see it or put it in storage or get rid of it.

I explained that he has no money. He he can't even meet his bills most months, and I have to support him through that. There's no storage unit.

Ma'am, you have a large fence on

the property there. If all those items were behind

the fence, there would be no issues whatsoever.

Yeah. But then he can't work with them.

He would have to keep the gate open. Yes. So he'll have to move them and store them back there. And then when he needs them, pull them out of the area and place them back in when he's done. Anything else?

No. Okay. Based on number 25Dash122929AB, I find that the respondent is in violation of the city of Edgewater's code of ordinances as listed in the notice of violation and or citations filed in this matter. Consider the gravity of the violation, any actions to correct the violation, and any previous violations. I order that respondent correct the violation in case 20Five-twelve2929A on or before 02/22/2026.

In order to correct the violation, the respondent shall take the remedial action as set forth in the notice of violation and or citation. If the respondent does not comply with this order, a fine in the amount of $100 per day will be imposed for each day the violation continues past 02/22/2026. The respondent is further ordered to contact code enforcement and to arrange for an inspection of the property to verify compliance with this order. Additionally, for 20Five-twelve2929A and B, I do find that the citation find the amount of $75 in each matter shall be imposed. Thank you, ma'am.

Yes, ma'am. Next matter will be case 25Dash123214.

Good afternoon. I am Code Enforcement Officer Jacob McLaughlin. This is in relation to citation number 841 for 1955 Guava Drive, which is owned by Gary P. Warnock. On 12/23/2025, our department was given a list of commercial businesses who failed city inspections on their backflow prevention devices.

1955 Guava Drive was on the list for having the backflow buried in the ground instead of 12 inches above ground level. On December 30, I went to the property and posted a notice of violation for violation of section 19 dash 25 cross connection. On 01/05/2026, the property owner, Gary Warnock, came into our office and showed us pictures of his backflow. The picture showed that he dug a 12 inch hole underneath the backflow. He clarified that he did not hire a plumber, and he dug the hole himself.

We informed him that the violation was still present and that he will need to raise the backflow device 12 inches above the ground level. He told both myself and my supervisor, Myron, that he is not going to raise the backflow. We then informed him that if he is refusing to correct the violation, that he will be issued a citation. He responded by saying, see you in court. We asked if he wanted to wait a moment to sign the citation, and he said to deliver it instead. Later that day, at 01:03PM, citation number 841 was posted at the property. On January 9, Mr. Warnock informed Public Works that his backflow repairs were completed. On January 13, the city reinspected the backflow and verified that it was raised in compliance. All notices and provisions of Chapter 10, Article 27 have been complied with.

Staff recommends a citation of $150 for violation of Section 19 dash 25 cross connection. No daily fines are requested as the violation is now in compliance.

Okay. Anybody here for the respondent?

Gary Warnock, nineteen fifty five Wawa. I presented pictures of what I did as far as the height above grade. On that particular spot,

my approach Yes. I'm going to need you to go back and speak in the microphone.

On that particular spot, looking at the valve as you see it, there is a hill, a berm of dirt. On the other side of that berm is a water retention or runoff. You can't dig into that. If you put the valve at 18 over 12 to 30 inches above grade, the valve will be up here. It's kind of hard for the guys to inspect and work on it.

12 inches is required. I complied, and they didn't like it. Here I am, probably going to have to pay the citation, but I did not want the backflow valve to leak into the city.

I had that repaired right away, but they're not happy. Okay. So from the picture that you provided to me, it looks like you dug a hole. There's a 12 it's like a 12 inches mark on there. The code says 12 inches above ground level.

Above grade. And nowhere in 1925 does it speak of that. Anybody want to dispute that?

The pictures you showed of the backflow with the hole buried underneath it were not in compliance with the code.

It's not even in the code. 1925 did not speak to the height of the valve whatsoever.

The notice of violation that was provided clearly said 12 inches above the ground level.

I got the information from the young lady right there. It doesn't say in my code 12H is above ground. Where does it say that in the city ordinances?

It says it in the Florida Administrative Code,

which is adopted by utility department for

the state of Florida and enforced by us. Well, you know, we So when we explained it to you in the office and your refusal to listen, left us no choice to move forward with a citation. We have not had any similar issue with any other commercial property in our entire city. Everyone understands that there has to be a height difference between the grade of the ground. Changing the grade of the ground by digging a hole underneath your backflow does not comply with what we requested. We requested that the actual pipe be raised so that if something happens or it pops, there is a height difference there. Because most things are gravity fed, and there's a bunch of other technicalities that go into it.

There is a height difference between the bottom of that valve and the dirt.

It's a moot point because it's all in compliance.

So worse In any event, you were able to remedy the problem?

Yes, I was.

Okay. I think at that January 5 meeting, if you would have just listened to code enforcement, probably wouldn't be looking at a fine at this point.

They shouldn't be looking at a fine at all.

Okay.

I'm going to ask for a continuance if I can get one. And I'm going have Tommy Smith come in here and explain to you about that situation. You see around the backside of that valve, that's a berm of dirt.

Mhmm.

It's it's holding water on the other side. If I dig that down, no water retention.

Well, it's in compliance right now, so you were able to fix the problem.

I didn't change the height of that valve. I changed the height of the dirt.

Okay.

Yeah, and yes, the valve was rebuilt.

Okay. As

far as a continuance goes, you were properly noticed for this hearing, so I'm not going to grant a continuance. I don't see any cause to grant continuance. If you had any witnesses, then they should have been here today. So is there anything else that you would like to offer?

No, sir.

Okay. Based on the testimony and evidence presented in case 20Five-one23214, I find that the respondent is in violation of the City Of Edgewater Code of Ordinances as listed in the notice of violation and or citation filed in this matter consider the gravity of the violation and the actions to correct the violation and any previous violations. I heard that respondent is subject to a citation fine in the amount of $150 This is a class two violation. Since the property is in compliance, no daily fines or liens are to be assessed. That was all, sir.

Thank you. Do I go next door and pay the young lady?

You can.

Yes, you can. Right.

Get that young lady with their cap. She'll give you a paper and document to stick with her.

There you have it. Perfect. Thank you.

Case 20Five-one23223.

There we go. My apologies. Alright. Good afternoon. My name is Myron San Miguel. I'm the code supervisor for City of Edgewater. This is gonna be Case25Dash123223 for citation number 0037. Property address in violation is 2627 Lime Tree Drive in Edgewater, Florida 32141. The owners are William and Pamela Bolds. This case was started from a complaint by the neighbors who reside on Kumquat Drive regarding repeated violations of excessive noise brought on by loudspeaker music playing in the backyard of the residence at 2627 Lime Tree.

The homes are three multiple lots away from each other, and the noise decibels were peaking at times above 70 decibels. In a residential zone area, the required decibel limit is no more than 60. The code requires noise to be no more than 60 at the property line. So the fact that it was peaking above those levels three houses away is is concerning. The notice of violation was issued on 12/29/2025.

Excuse me. There's a typo in that. So it should be twenty twenty five, not twenty twenty six. After previous warnings issued in person to the homeowners, citation 37 was consequently issued for $75 due to the music continuing beyond the notice of violation and after prior warnings. To date, the property owner does continue to play music in the backyard that exceeds the noise decibels. The code strictly prohibits the use of a loudspeaker on the, in the property owner miscease all use of any outdoor speaker devices. All notice and provisions of chapter 10 article 27 have been complied with. Staff recommends that the special magistrate find the property in violation of the code, uphold the $75 citation, and additionally, $250 daily fines if the property continues beyond today's date.

Thank you. Anybody here for the respondent? You want

to respond?

Yes. Yeah.

My name is William Boles.

And I'm Pamela Boles.

I play my music. I have for fourteen years at this same address, the same volume, neighbor, neighbor, two neighbors behind, perfectly fine with it. The police came four or five times. I turned it down. I turned it down. Well, that wasn't enough because the complainant called Myron. He come out and talked to me. He talked to my neighbor on the side of me and talked to the neighbor behind me. They said they didn't have any problem with it whatsoever. Okay.

So he leaves. Then he comes back a different time. He takes the reading out front, and it reads 47. He he comes over and says, you want to see it on my camera or whatever? I said, no, I believe you. So I thought nothing more about it. Everything's fine. Well, he got some texts and some emails from the complainant saying that, oh, your decibels are way too high because they went and got a decibel meter. Well, I was furious about that because I've been getting a notification from their information. So I got a decibel meter.

Still to this day, it reads 60 in my backyard. For a split second, it'll read a 60. It's not going on and on and on and on. 6060, 60. 70 has never been hit with my decimal read. I know mine's not official, but neither was theirs to start the whole problem. I don't know what else to say.

So I can confirm the the the part of his conversation when he was discussing that we didn't catch any readings in the beginning. That's true. When I went around and spoke to the neighbors, though, it was after a complaint was made, so there was no noise happening at the time. And the few neighbors that they were able to speak to did state that they didn't have any issues or concerns, but that they could hear his music when he played it. At the time, our code specifically outlines how a decibel reader should be calibrated and looked at.

With noise complaints and violations, it's a it's a challenge because we have to be able to hear it at the time of the issue or be given evidence to show that there is a continued issue and violation out there between the the law enforcement calls, the videos and documents that were submitted to me. I checked the calibration on how they're reading the meter. They're reading it exactly how our code says to, and it's peaking above 70. It's not a consistency of of volume. It's when they play loud bass music or certain things that come across.

Ultimately, where we're at is the code strictly prohibits loudspeakers to and and in their entirety. So what may not be a issue or a noise problem for some of your neighbors is irregardless of the fact that the volume level is peaking above what we would be considered reasonable in a residential neighborhood community. The shores, there's zero lot lines, lot of them. You're on top of each other. You live around a bunch of people. And if it's a continued issue and challenge like this is when we have to step in and request you guys to stop. Further, even after I've addressed it and spoke to you guys about the issue and requested that you stop playing, you continue to play the music. I do have the complainants here, and I'd like to call them up at this time to speak on their behalf.

Okay. I think she was going to say something. Let her get first, and then you can call up the witness.

We got a decimal reader, and I he was playing the music the same way he always does. And I took it over there and walked over there near their property, and it never read high until their dog started barking. And that's when it came up. And everything I've researched about decibel readers, traffic going by I was actually in our backyard the other day and had it on out there with him. And a motorcycle came by, and it went way up.

So it's like anything could affect the decibel reader. And everything I've read about it, it could be an air conditioning unit, conversation, the wind blowing. There are so many things that can affect it. And he actually turned the music down. And he does play it, but not that loud. You can't really hear it anywhere. I hear their music, but I haven't complained about that. I hear their dog barking a lot. It's like I don't understand it. It seems like it's really unnecessary, and I'd love to be able to get along with our neighbors.

So there are videos that the city did submit. And I did review those. And I did see that it was above the 60 decibel limit. I did not see any vehicles driving by or any other sounds like that?

Where where was the decibel meter read from?

I I would like to call the witnesses up at this time, and they can speak to all of that.

Your your decibel?

My decibel reader was in the public easement area right next to their house, two two to three house lots away from yours.

On their private property?

No. On the public easement area.

Okay. Have you had a chance to view the videos?

Well There's

there wasn't any sound to it.

That's I I object. There absolutely was. I tried to show it to them at their door. He refused to speak to me. He went inside, and his wife was left outside to talk to me.

To me, and I couldn't hear any sound. I just saw the reading, and it was just of the decibel reader. It didn't show where it was at or anything.

What we can probably do is play those videos

Yeah, we have them. We can play them.

So they can see it for evidence and then have a chance to respond.

Can I have my witnesses speak first, would you like to play the videos first, Michelle?

Oh, you can have your witnesses speak first. That's fine.

MARGARET Hello, I'm Barbara Smith, 20

WELLER: I'm Denise Eiler.

MARGARET WELLER: First of all, they were not hearing our music because we haven't played in here in months. So just to clarify. But

we

are here because of ongoing loud bass music that has been disrupting our household for the past nine months. It was lower before. Like, you could just barely hear it. But then when we came back from her mom's funeral, it was the bass was loud. And that's when we started having issues.

The excessive volume, particularly the heavy bass, has made it extremely difficult for us to live peacefully in our own home. The noise is so loud and persistent that we are unable to go outside or enjoy our backyard and doing our gardening, playing with our dogs, tender our butterflies, and just sit and watch the birds. We can no longer host cookouts or like friends and family member because of music disturbs any normal conversation or gatherings. Even on our side of our home, the sound carries through the walls and the windows significantly affecting our daily lives. There is no peace and comfort on our property when the music is playing.

The prolonged disturbance has taken a toll on our health and overall well-being. The consistent noise has caused stress, loss of breath, and ongoing sense of frustration in what should be a place of comfort and security. This has been going on for almost a year now.

Thank you. When

we got back from my mom's funeral, we had people staying at our house for a week because I had to bring stuff back. The minute we came back, the people that were staying at our house said, somebody has a really loud base around here and a really loud noise. We've had people over doing work on our house. They commented on it. I can't speak for them. I know why it's probably hearsay. I really don't want problems with the neighbors. I went over to their house when it first started, knocked on the door. You came to the door. And I asked that you just turn the bass down.

I said, we like music. We love hearing music. But it's just the bass is just touting us. She literally said she didn't like it either, but she would talk to her. And I tried to handle this without coming here and causing a problem and having problems with neighbors. But it seems like it just doesn't stop. And this has been going on for over a year. It has not been going on for nine months. Because my mother died in January. I really don't want the friction.

I'm just asking that the base go down a little bit so we can enjoy our own, too. That's all I'm asking. It should have never gotten to this far. It really should have.

Okay. Thank you. Let's go ahead and play the videos so they can see them. If you could just explain where this location is.

So the code specifically outlines and states that when Avaya noise violation is being read off of a meter, it has to be in a slow speed, which this is clearly stating, and you can see where it's peaking. I explained to the complainants as well, and they can testify to this, that code enforcement doesn't look at it or get involved if it's going to like sixty two, sixty three, and then dropping back down. It has to be a consistency above the decibels of 60 because we do give reasonable consideration when it comes to different kinds of music, depending on what's going on. As the respondents explains, you know, vehicles, traffic, all that kind of stuff, yes, some of that can play a factor. However, when you can hear the bass in the video, you can see the music correlating with correlating with how the decimal reader is going, it's it's unquestionably a challenge.

And that last video is clearly not at the property line. It's a lot farther away, correct?

Correct. So the complainant's property is three houses away. It's not next door or in the backyard abutting to it. It's multiple properties away. So even if it's reading 63, 65 at their lot, that means at the property line, it's going to be louder.

What is C for? Isn't that the white? It's supposed to be a.

I'm not sure what that c is for, sir. Well Probably Celsius for degrees because if you look at the meter, it says a and c for Celsius and Fahrenheit. Yeah. It's temperature. It has nothing to do with the volume coming through at a slow slow decibel rate.

Well, which weight which weight is this measured at?

Where we're at, though, has nothing to do with light. Where we're at is the code prohibits you to have a loud speaker playing your music outside. That's so we we can keep going back and forth in in regards to the numbers on a decibel reader, but where we're at is the code outlines and prohibits a loudspeaker playing music, which is what you have, which is what's continuing, which is what we've requested you to stop doing. So even if the decibel reader said 110, it wouldn't matter. The violation is still the same.

Okay. Another thing that I'd like to say is where our house is, there's a house next door, and then there's a drive through area there, and there are trees everywhere. They have a storage building. The people behind them have a big storage building. I don't understand how all this can go through all that. There's so much there. And he's turned it down. He turned it down and

My decimal reads 60. I think this video clearly shows that again.

But that was before he turned

it down.

He's trying to

wanna know what the weight if there's a a weight and a c weight. In the

chat GBT, he says a def d b.

Yeah. So we can't go off of what an AI chat GBT says. We have to go

It's underneath the Florida Volusia County Edgewater code.

So you just you just named the county, the state, the city. So we

That's right. It's all the same.

Is not all the same, sir. If you have any other evidence you'd like to present, I'll take that now. No. If have any other provisions or anything like that, Okay. Is there anything else from either party?

GREGORY The city has nothing further.

GREGORY DELL:

So I think there's a simple solution to this that will allow you to get along with your neighbors

Get a different decimal leader.

And play your music, and that's just to turn down the bass. No one's saying you don't

have That's

that's

that's frequency. That's not decibels. Base ain't going down. I like the base. The volume might go down, but the base ain't going down.

Okay. Well, they go out there and they keep getting measurements like this, and you're gonna be in the same spot that you are now. We'll see. So it might be an expensive music hobby that you have. Okay.

Based on the testimony of evidence in case twenty five-one hundred twenty three thousand two hundred twenty three that the respondent is in violation of the City Of Edgewater's Code of Ordinances as listed in the notice of violation and or citation filed in this matter. Consider the gravity of the violation, any actions to correct the violation, and any previous violations. Order that the respondent correct the violation on or before 02/12/2026 by the end of the day today. In order to correct the violation, the respondent shall take the remedial action as set forth in the notice of violation, which is turn down the music. If the respondent does not comply with this order, a fine the amount of $250 per day will be imposed for each day the violation continues past close of business today, 02/12/2026.

The respondent is further ordered to well, you can't contact code enforcement for compliance, but the respondent is ordered to not play the music above the allowed limits per city code. Furthermore, fine that the respondent is subject to a citation fine in the amount of $75

Can I say one more thing?

Sure.

Okay. He has played his music, the loud it was when they first complained, for years.

And

then all of a sudden, they're complaining. I don't get it. Haven't they lived there longer than a year or so?

It doesn't matter, ma'am, under the code.

It doesn't, Okay.

So it doesn't matter if you could have new people move in, they might take objection to it. The city code says what it says, and it provides the sound limits for Okay. Thank you. Like I said, there's a simple solution to it. That's just to turn it down to where it's not above 60. Don't have to stop playing your music or you can get some headphones. Okay. We'll go back to new business new business 6ACase20Five-one20Three-one17.

It's mine.

It's in compliance.

This is in relation to citation number 840 for address 311 South Ridgewood Avenue, which is owned by Edgewater Medical Service LLC. On 12/08/2025, we received a referral regarding two semi trucks and trailers displaying expired tags being stored in the parking lot of the closed Badcock Furniture Store. I attempted contact via phone and email with the owner. On December 15, I spoke to the owner. He was aware of the trucks and trailers being stored there and said that the tags were now valid.

He clarified that the parking lot was being used as a terminal for the trucks and trailers between use. Explained I that the property is not zoned to be a truck freight terminal and that the vehicle will have to be removed. On December 22, unnoticed violation was posted due to the vehicles not being moved. On December 30, the trucks and trailers were still there. So citation number 840 was posted for violation of section 21 dash 33 subs dot one and dot two zoning uses and restrictions. On 01/20/2026, the property was brought into compliance. All notices and provisions of chapter 10 article 27 have been complied with. Staff recommends a citation of $75, which was paid on January 21. No daily fines are requested as the property is in compliance.

K. Anybody here for the respondent? Seeing nobody, based on the testimony and evidence presented in case 25Dash123117, find out the respondent is in violation of the city of Edgewater's code of ordinances as listed in the notice of violation and or citation filed in this matter. The citation has been paid. The property is in compliance. There will be no further action other than finding them in violation. The next one, Myron's. Okay. Let's go to 7C25-one23108.

James Ogden is the owner of the property located at 118 East Ocean Avenue in Edgewater, Florida. It has been found in violation of section ten-one 113 inoperable vehicle, the City Of Edgewater's code of ordinances. On 11/25/2025, I received complaint referenced to the listed location having unsafe inoperable vehicles on the property. I arrived and observed two vehicles with either expired and or no registration details on the tags. A door hanger was left with instructions on correcting the violations.

On December 1725, I conducted an inspection, observed one of the vehicles had a current registration decal and the other did not have a decal on it. Notice of violation was issued with correction date of 12/21/2025. On 01/05/2025, inspection noted no change. Citation zero 551 notice of hearing was subsequently issued. It was posted to the property since certified mail of the owner and posted at city hall.

During this process, the owner did not attempt to contact code enforcement nor was there any contact made. All notices and provision chapter 10 article 27 have been complied with. Staff recommends a special magistrate fine Jane Dogden in violation of section 10 dash one one three in operable vehicle with the code ordinances and assessed a citation fine of $75. Violation has been corrected and no daily fines are being requested.

Anybody here for the respondent? Seeing nobody, based on the testimony and evidence presented in case 25Dash123108, find that respondent is in violation of the city of Edgewater's code of ordinances We are that. Able We not able $75. No daily fines or liens are to be assessed as the property is now in compliance. Alright.

Case 26Dash43. No problem.

Alright. This is gonna be for 24 or 26 dash 43?

Yes.

Perfect. So, again, my name is Myron Sammiguel. I'm the code supervisor for City of Edgewater. This is for case number 26Dash43 with a citation number of 0036. The property address of in violation is 122 Merrimack Street in Edgewater, Florida.

The owner is George and Rebecca Davis. They live in Great Falls, Virginia at 1010 Harriman Street. This case was opened up in response to a call from public works regarding an illegal connection to the city of Edgewater's water system at the water meter box in the right of way. Upon my inspection, the property house was demolished by the homeowner and was having a new home rebuilt on the lot. The construction company, Wolinski Builders LLC, was working with Howell Plumbing, who illegally connected to the water supply to continue construction.

Consequently, the citation 36 was issued after investigating and finding that the connection was deliberately made and without permission. They straight piped a PVC directly into the water main. Per our code and per state regulations, it's actually a misdemeanor. So I made contact with the plumbing company, confirmed everything, talked to the construction company, and emailed the property owner back and forth a little. Spoke to a property manager here, explained what was going on, advised them what to do to move forward.

The property is in compliance now technically because the city went out and removed everything that was illegal. He connected, and then the citation was also paid. So the city requests that they get a finding of fact and set as a repeat offense repeat offender, excuse me, if the violation happens again within the next five years of the date of the order.

K.

Anybody here for the respondent? Seeing nobody, based on testimony and evidence presented in case 20Six-forty3, find out the respondent is in violation of the City of Edgewater's Code of Ordinances as listed in the notice of violation and or citation filed in this matter. Consider the gravity of the violation and actions to correct the violation and any previous violations. There will be no further action since the citation has been paid. No daily fines other than the findings that the respondent was in violation.

Anything else? All right. We're adjourned.