Code Enforcement/ Magistrate - Special Meeting

Okay.

Alright, it's 02:00 on 04/10/2025. We will call the meeting to order. My name is Ryan Knight, and I'm the special magistrate for the city. The procedures of this hearing are that courtroom. Courtroom shall be observed and shall govern be the proceedings.

The Hearsay is 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 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. Please call the first case. Or actually, do you swear the people in or do I do that? Okay. If there's anybody that will be giving testimony, please rise and raise your right hand. Do you swear or affirm to tell the the whole truth, and nothing but the truth? Thank you.

First case, case number 20Four-one1.

Good afternoon. My name is Myron Samiguel. I serve as the code supervisor for City of Edgewater. This is going to be case number 24Dash181 under citation number 0023. The property address in violation is 1626 Orange Tree Drive in Edgewater, Florida 32132.

The owners are David and Suzanne Jakovich. Their mailing address is 135 Jenkins Street, Suite 105B, Box 351, San Augustine, Florida 32080 This case originally opened up in November 2024 due to a call that came in from central dispatch in regards to some dogs fighting and attacking each other. Upon arrival, the dogs were found loose and running at large. We were able to get them secured and speak to the tenant who lives at this property. They rent, and these dogs have a history, unfortunately, of getting out often.

And they had severely injured one of the animals. In speaking to the renter at the time, he stated that the dog of injury only had superficial wounds. Unfortunately, those wounds were actually life threatening and he ended up owner surrendering that dog to the Indian River Animal Clinic, where the dog subsequently had to be euthanized. So we've had a history here with challenges with animal problems becoming a public nuisance. Part of our process with animal control in coming on to cases like this is to ensure that all the animals are up to date with rabies, that they're spayed and neutered, and that they're coming into full compliance with all the code regulations within the city.

Due to the fact that the dogs were not vaccinated or up to date with spaying and neutering, that is the course of action that we followed through with. It took them a very long time to do that, so much so that the property owner had to issue them a seven day notice to be evicted. If they don't come into full compliance with that, Unfortunately, some of the dogs were rehomed outside of city limits. So that was kind of part of their recommendation to come into compliance, and that's what they chose to do. They were waiting the one dog to receive the paperwork for updated rabies vaccines.

Everything else had come into compliance by the end date before this magistrate hearing. However, beyond the deadline given of the notice of violation, all notices sent to the property were sent certified and posted on the property at the time, as well as given to the property owner with confirmation from him. The renter, Mr. Van Cleef, has come into, again, full compliance with the spay and neuter and the rabies. So, at this time, we would just request a finding of fact that they were beyond the date of the notice of violation given.

And the citation has since been paid. So, beyond that, if it happens again, we would consider them a repeat offender for having animals without proper compliance.

Okay. So at this point, there's no request for a fine of $250 per day because they are in compliance and obviously if the animal is spayed or neutered? Correct. There anybody here for the respondent? No, sir.

Based upon the testimony and evidence presented in case 20Four-0000181A, we'll find that the respondent is in violation of the City Of Edgewater City Code Section five-three seven. As listed in the notice of violation, filed in this matter, consider the gravity of the violation, any actions by the violator to correct notice of compliance. So there will be no finding post today. However, the record will reflect that there was a finding of fact that Section five-thirty seven was violated. If there's any future violations, it could be subject to repeat violations and repeat offender.

There been an affidavit of compliance filed for this case?

Yes, sir. There's affidavit for the notices. And then the other thing, Mr. Knight, is I believe because if there was multiple counts of this given multiple dogs, I think there's a A, B, and a C, right, Ms. Covington? And D. So if that record could just reflect that for all four of those.

Sure. I was sort of unclear. Was there one dog that hasn't been spayed or neutered?

There was up until recently. So that dog has now since been spayed and neutered with evidence provided that it was finalized.

Okay. So yes, that will apply to cases a, B, C and D under the same case number as far as the binding effect and the order goes. Anything else for these cases?

Nothing further from the city.

So next case is case number 25Dash121813.

Good afternoon. Officer Haywood, city of Edgewater code enforcement. In case you're hearing his q o z b two LLC, which is the owners of property located at 1525 South Ridgewood Avenue, Edgewater, Florida. It's been found in violation of section ten five hundred minimum standards of the city Of Edgewater's code ordinances. Background to this is approximately 01/15/2025.

Code enforcement received several complaints regarding the appearance of the listed property, which is a tire store that stores old tires in view of the public. The property next door was being worked on. And I monitored this location for improvements due to next door property improvements. On 01/15/2025, after no improvements observed, I issued a notice of violation and spoke with the tenant regarding the tire issues. He understood and advised he's working with the owner to resolve the issues.

Correction data on that notice of violation was given to 02/25/2025. However, on 01/23/2025, supervisor Sam Miguel met with the tenant and informed and information on how to correct the violation was given on 01/24/2025. A permit was applied for and eventually issued. On 03/27/2025 at the direction of San Miguel, citation 0525 notice of hearing was subsequently issued. It was posted to the property, sent certified mail to the owner, and posted at City Hall.

The tenant contacted officer supervisor San Miguel regarding the citation and advised it has been a struggle to get a fence company for the install. The fence was installed prior to the hearing date. However, the rear of the property was not fenced in, causing the rear neighbors to have a view of the tire stacked in the rear. Officer San Miguel contacted the owner and stated the rear would need fenced in. An additional time frame was given to correct the violation before daily fines start. All notices and provisions of chapter 10 article 28 have been complied with. Staff recommends special magistrate fine q o z b two l l c in violation of section ten five hundred minimum standards and assist citation $75 and a $100 daily fine if not corrected by which we gave them up to 05/10/2025.

Based on the testimony and evidence presented in case number 20Five-one21813, I find that respondent is in violation of City Code Section ten-five 100, City of Edgewater Code of Ordinances, as listed in the notice of violation filed in this matter, considering the gravity of the violation, any actions by the violator to correct the violation and any previous violations by the violator. I order that respondents correct the violation on or before 05/10/2025. In order to correct the violation, respondent shall take the remedial action as set forth in the notice of violation. If the respondent does not comply with this order, a fine of $100 per day will be imposed for each day the violation continues past 05/10/2025. The respondent is further ordered to contact a code enforcement officer or the code enforcement office for compliance and to arrange an inspection of the property to verify compliance with this order.

Next case, case

And I'll you. You. First operable vehicle of the city of Edgewater's code of ordinances. I'll A turn little background on this is around 02/19/2025, while on patrol observed a black vehicle in the driveway with a list of location without a vehicle registration. During the course of this investigation, it was noted that a dump truck and a black Mustang from this location was observed in the city right of way with the same violation.

Right of way violations were issued. A courtesy violation sticker and placed on the windows of the vehicles, and a courtesy note was issued for the vehicle and the driver with the correction date of 02/24/2025. On February 24, I conducted an inspection and noted no attempt to correct the violations. It was noted that the courtesy sticker been removed from the Mustang in the right of way. A forty eight hour tow notices were left on these vehicles.

Subsequently, a notice of violation was issued with the correction date of 02/26/2025 as this officer believed seven days was sufficient time to remove vehicles from the property. On 02/26/2025, another inspection was conducted. It was noted that the Mustang was now out of the city right of way and placed in the driveway. The black key was still in the driveway without a tag. I spoke with the with the owner.

He advised the key was going to be removed from the property and the must Mustang will be placed in the garage. Indicated the dump truck as his dad's vehicle, and he was not or he was aware of the notices. The owner requested for and was given an extension to correct the violations until 03/05/2025. On 03/05/2025, I arrived and noted the violations were not corrected. The Kia was still in the drive without a registration, and the Mustang was now covered with the car cover.

Citation 0523, notice of hearing was subsequently issued. It was posted to the property, sent certified mail to the owner, and posted at City Hall. All notices and provisions of chapter 10 article 20 have been complied with. Staff recommends a special magistrate fine Robert Andrew Ingram in violation of section ten one one three inoperable vehicle assist a citation fine of $75 and an additional daily fine of $100 is being requested if not corrected by 04/20/2025.

Okay. Seeing, no one from the respondent here today. Based upon the testimony that was presented in case 20Five-one21951. I find that respondent is in violation of City Code Section ten-one 113 of the City of Edgewater's Code of Ordinances as listed in notice violation filed in this matter to consider the gravity of the violation and the actions by the violator to correct the violation and any previous violations by the violator. I order that respondent correct the violation on or before 04/20/2025.

In order to correct the violation, respondent shall take the remedial action as set forth in the notice of violation. If the respondent does not comply with this order, a fine of $100 per day will be imposed for each day the violation continues past 04/20/2025. The respondent is further ordered to contact the code enforcement office or a code enforcement officer for compliance and to arrange an inspection of the property to verify compliance with this order. Additionally, I find that the respondent is subject to a citation fine of $75 I'd like to go back to the case that we previously heard. It was case 20Five-one21951.

Actually, I'm sorry, it's case 20Five-one21813. For the order, I failed to mention that the respondent is subject to a citation fine of $75 I just want to clarify that. Okay, next case, case 20Five-one22008.

Wright's been Thomas, Leshner and Laura are the property owners located at 3404 India Palm Drive, Florida. It's been found in violation of section ten ninety eight property maintenance of the city of Edgewater's code of ordinances. On 03/17/2025, code enforcement received an email from city employee, Dan Worrell, referenced an illegal U utilities connection at 3404 India Palm Drive. The email stated the water was disconnected from this location, and an employee checked on the February 14 and discovered a new connection installed. During this check, was discovered that the property had weeds in excess of 12 inches.

Notice of violation was issued with the correction date of 03/27/2025. 03/28/2025, we conducted an inspection, observed no changes. Citation zero five two six notes of hearing was subsequently issued. It was posted at the property, sent certified mail to the owners, and posted at city hall. Excuse me. Additionally, an abatement was subsequently issued for the property. All courtroom.

I'm I'm nobody sure present for the respondent in this matter, based on testimony and evidence presented in case number 20Five-one22008, I find that respondent was in violation of City Of Edgewater City Code Section ten-ninety eight as listed in the notice of violation filed in this matter. Based upon the fact that the property is currently in compliance, there are no daily fines or liens to be assessed. However, the respondent is subject to the citation fine of $75 in this matter. Any questions?

No, they're not in compliance.

Mr. Knight, just for clarity, they are not in compliance and the city will be abating the property. We are just requesting an assessment of the $75 citation fee.

Okay. So no daily fines are requested at this?

Correct. Because we will be abating the property.

Okay. So to clarify the record, the property is not in compliance. However, there will be no daily fines or liens to be assessed at this time. Quarter the '19. Correct.

Case 25122051 is actually an extension of 25122008 for the same address of 3404 Indian Palm Drive. Owners of the property, Wrightsman, Thomas, Leshner, Laura, are the owners of this property. It's been found in violation of section nineteen four, unlawful connection, and section nineteen twenty two, tampering with meters and tap of the city of Edge Water's code of ordinances. On 03/17/2025, code enforcement received an email from city employee Dan Worrell referenced to an illegal utilities connection at 3404 Indy Palm Drive. Email stated that water meter was removed from this location, and a city employee checked on the February 14 and discovered a new connection installed.

Email provided information and photos of the illegal hookup. Our responder to this location observed the possible area for water connection covered up with fresh dirt. Due to the provided email and photos, citation zero five two six notice of hearing was subsequently issued with the two violations. It was posted to the property, sent certified mail to the owners, and posted at city hall. All notices and provisions of chapter 10, article 20 have been complied with.

Staff recommends the special magistrate fine Reitzman Thomas and Leshner Laura in violation of section nineteen four, unlawful connection, and section nineteen twenty two tampering with meters tap, and assessed a citation fine of $300 per violation totaling $600. No daily fines are being requested as the water meter was removed from this location, which would put this case in compliance.

Thank you. I'm seeing nobody from the respondent of

Directors

hundred twenty 1. Of find of that the respondent is in violation of the City of Edgewater's Code of Ordinances, Section nineteen-twenty two and Section Mr. Other equation. Time

And

I'll have about of $300 and case the twenty five-one hundred twenty two-51b. Respondent shall pay that, as indicated on the citation. Yes, thank you. So the 02/13/2025 minutes of the enforcement hearing are approved. Thank you for the reminder.

And with that, the meeting will be adjourned.