Code Enforcement Board - Regular Meeting

Here you can find balloons, everything for birthdays, candles, plates, we rent chairs, tables, jumpers, everything you need here you can find it. There are for all children, there are for baby chow, for revelations. I like to work with my daughter because we are both here, we communicate everything, everything is quiet, we like what we did, everything. We chose Miami because when I came to my country, I stayed here and I didn't move from here. My children were born here and we haven't moved from here at all. In the future, we want to open a bigger business, more for my family, because since I have grandchildren, I want all of that to grow for my grandchildren.

Thank you.

Thank you.

Do you solemnly swear or affirm the testimony you're about to give is the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth? Thank you. You may have a seat. Do you solemnly swear and affirm you will translate from English to Spanish and Spanish to English to the best of your ability? Thank you.

Do you solemnly swear and affirm that you will translate from English to Creole to English to the best of your ability? Thank you.

All right. Yeah. Mr. Williams? Present. Mr. Rodriguez? Present. Mr. Golan? Present. Mr. Madan? Oh, sorry.

Oh, sorry.

Mr. Malak, Mr. Moshi, we have quorum.

You forgot me.

You forgot, you got two folks you forgot, I think.

Ulysses. Present. Oh, sorry. And Mr. Galan.

Present. Thank you. I heard somebody from the audience say president. Listen, listen. All right. All right, no problem.

Good evening. Most of you are here today for the first time. There's a small number of you that are here for mitigation. When your case is called, please come up to the podium, state your name and the address you're here on behalf of. Let the board know whether you're guilty or not guilty of the violation. If you plead guilty to the violation, the city will inform the board in a summary fashion as to what the violation is. They'll make a recommendation for the amount of days you need to cure the violation. The board will vote unanimously to give you the amount of days that the city recommends, or more days or less days, however the board votes, and they'll apply a per diem violation if you don't comply by the date given. If you're a first-time violator with a residential property, it's up to $250 per diem. If you're a first-time non-residential commercial property, it's $1,000 per diem. If you're a repeat violator, if you're a residential repeat violator, it's $500 maximum. And if you're a Non-residential commercial repeat violator, it's up to $5,000. If you plead not guilty, the city will put on its case. You will put on your response to the city. And the board will go through a similar process, vote, give you a per diem and a time to comply. If you don't have a power of attorney by this point, you may want to come and see me. If you're not the owner or the managing member of the property or a licensed Florida attorney. If you're here for mitigation, there's a chart.

There's the chart.

There may be a chart, we'll find it, that tells you what the city can and can't do for you as far as mitigation. The board is bound by that chart. They cannot go lower than what that chart permits. So take a look at it if you're waiting. We'll be calling mitigations first. All orders of the board are appealable to 11th Traditional Circuit Court of Florida within 30 days. One last thing. The few cases that we have that are on for mitigation, when you're done, that the board determines what your mitigation amount is, come over here and wait for me in the corner so I can give you a copy of your order so you can take it with you and payment instructions. And at the podium... There is a piece of paper, if you're here for the first time, once the board gives you the time to comply, it tells you how to request an extension of time. Are the papers there? Yeah. For extension of time? I'm sorry?

Yeah, it's up there.

Okay.

So take that paper with you, and it'll tell you how to ask for an extension of time. All right. Good evening, everyone.

We'll try to get everybody out of here pretty quickly. Can we get the cases? I see we have a special appearance, so we want to do that after mitigations.

I understand that Rachel may have some special requests.

I see there's one special appearance.

You don't, so I can call mitigations and... No, I know.

All right, no worries. I'm good, I don't... Whatever, I'm good. All right, we'll go straight to mitigations, okay?

You do you. Mitigation sounds great. Great. Mitigation, if the special appearance clicked in, we can take that after that and then do the... Say no more. Whatever you want to do, I'm fine.

Mitigation. Yeah, let's get out of the way. Page 146, property address 1121 Northwest 2nd Street, case number 00066081.

This is a vacant lot. The lien ran to $64,000. The minimum is $7,500, even, I mean, $64,000. I don't know, my brain, I got to get back into the swing of things. And so even 20% of 64,000 is over more than 7,500. So the minimum is 7,500.

Good evening. Stick your name in that just for the record. Good evening. My name is Pablo Calatrava. I am the manager of the new corporation that owned the property since last year. Thank you for your time, first of all. No problem. The reason of my appearance here is that, to the best of my knowledge, by the time that this violation occurred, there was a single family home there. You know, so I would like to put that in consideration. Okay, let me check. Let me check and see.

Hold on. Maybe.

And how soon after you got the notices for violations did you comply? Yes, sir.

How soon afterwards? I bought the property last year. So right now I try to put it in compliance with all my means.

I bought pictures from today. So you bought the property with the violations? Yes, I brought it on the court. Thank you.

It looks like it was an empty lot.

Just an empty lot, no previous use of the... Madam, if you put the address in...

I'm looking at the pictures from October 4th of 2023.

Okay, no, because when you see in the internet, you see the old structure that was there because it was demolished by the city. I paid for the demolition after I bought the property.

Right. Well, it still may have owed money on a demolition.

Yeah, yeah, yeah. It was clear.

But that this property was cited for the empty lot being overgrown.

Better maintain the lot and fail to register a lot.

So it's $7,500. There was not a structure on the property when it was cited. Got it. So it wouldn't be able to revert to being a single-family home.

So the best we can do today is mitigate it down to $7,500, okay, from the $64,000. Okay. Okay? Thank you very much. Can I get a motion, please?

Yeah, move to reduce it to $7,500. Second.

Second. All those in favor? Aye. Thank you. Wait for your paper here, okay? Yeah, we'll wait for it. You're welcome. Thank you. Next case.

This was recently added on. It's add-on three. Case number CE 2018-022910. This is a mitigation? It's a mitigation. Okay. This was a reset from last July. Sir? Acosta?

This is 4101 Northwest 11th Place? Yes. Okay. This property is a vacant lot. The lien ran to $363,300. I remember. And we're back. And the minimum is $7,500. Can you state your name and address for the record?

Frank Acosta, 705 Southeast, 13th Circle, Homestead, Florida.

Gotcha. And so any background on this other than the lien amount and what we could do on it or the immediate previous use was a...

I'm going to make sure right now since it's an add-on. It says work without a permit, so... Yeah, because we don't have anything to look at, so... It looks like it was a single-family home. Lucky you. Single-family home with homestead, but it wouldn't have now. So when it was cited, it was a single-family home. Therefore, prior to it becoming a vacant lot, its past use was as a single-family home. Therefore, they are eligible for a minimum of $10,000, which is more than the $7,500, or... By unanimous vote, down to zero.

What's the use of the property now?

It's a vacant lot.

It's a vacant lot, okay. And you guys are selling it, or? It's gonna be your home? You're gonna be living there?

You gotta move the mic to the...

I have all the information you asked before here, if you'd like to see.

You got it all done?

All done. I rolled the dice.

All right. Good job.

Thank you.

So you're going to be living there, and you're getting ready to process plans for a new property, a new house?

That's going to be your homestead property. All right. I move to bring it down to zero. Can I get a second, please? Second.

Say what?

Second. Oh, thank you. All in favor?

Aye.

Aye.

Thank you, sir. We're for your paper. Thank you very much. You're welcome. Next case. It does.

Sometimes it does pay to come back, right?

This is add-on two, property address 3101 Southwest 4th Street, case number CE-2021-00-4165. Okay.

You know, I promise everybody we'll be out of here by 6.

This is 3101 Southwest 4th Street. This is a single family home with homestead exemption. The lien ran to $88,250. The minimum would be $5,000 or zero or down to zero with the unanimous vote. Good evening.

Good evening. You state your name and address for the record. Yes. Yes. I have a power of attorney. She's my aunt. Never had children. She's a widow, 87 years old.

Do we have the power of attorney?

Yeah.

She has the power of attorney, but that's the property owner giving her authority to speak.

Yeah, no, no, no. But I was just curious. Yeah, I gave it to him. Thank you.

Well, you see the violations that were actually issued in 2021. At that point, I was not in Miami. I was not aware of the violations. And When I came back to, oh, actually, my cousin that passed away from cancer, she reached out to him, and he was going to try to help her, but he passed away, and I never knew about it, okay? I take care of her through cameras and stay with her now twice a week to help her out, okay? And at that point, going through the mail, I come across a letter from the city of Miami, and when I read it, I almost... I freaked out. I said, yeah, do you know about this?

The violation, I'll let him know the violation was just for extra concrete and was for that side carport. Just the aluminum. That's what the violation was. So I don't know if you guys want to take it from there.

Hold on real quick. She lives at the property, right? That's her homestead. She lives there.

My aunt, yes.

Okay. Can I get a motion?

I will move to zero. Second.

Second. All those in favor? Aye. Thank you.

Thank you. yeah just wait for your paperwork over there thank you so much thank you so much for taking care of you god bless you thank you god bless you as well yeah page 158 property address 3377 southwest 29th terrace case number 00015188 good evening

The lien ran to $671,500. This is a homestead exempt duplex property. So the minimum is $5,000 or down to zero by unanimous vote.

Can you state your name and address for the record? Sure. My name is Uxon Ramirez, and I represent Navarro Property Holdings LLC, the owner of that company.

The new owners don't have exemption, but the old owners did, right? Yeah, so.

But we're looking at the new owners. I'm sorry. You're representing the new owners. Well, the current owners. You're representing the current owners.

Yeah, it doesn't have homestead exemption. Sorry. Yeah, there is no home. So the minimum is $10,000, but it can go down to zero, as low as zero with a unanimous vote. My error.

Thank you. So I just wanted to bring up a few points in relation to this file. The violation was back in June of 2022. The first notice of violation was June 8th of 2022. We did not get the actual affidavits when we got the city documents. The affidavit from the inspector at the time that posted or states in that affidavit that they posted this June 8th letter on the door was not until June 9th knowing that the correction timeline was only provided to June 10th. So essentially one business day to correct this violation at this property.

These were the ALF violations.

Right.

Remember those?

But these were serious situations too, so, okay. So in relation to this violation, it wasn't anything that had to do with the actual building, the structure. It wasn't a fire. It wasn't something that was hazardous. It's essentially the emergency, it's 2401 emergency plans and emergency preparedness measures required. Essentially the little roadmap to showcase the emergency exits. We believe that that was the violation. That's what's stated in the letter. But there's some inconsistencies in relation to those letters as well as the photos that the city took and saved as far as their evidence. Although we have the letter June 8th and the affidavit that states that that inspector specifically put that June 8th letter on the door on June 9th, The photos don't reflect that the note was posted until June 11th, after the time to correct the issue. On top of all of that, there were some other issues with the summons as well as to why my client could not attend the mitigation hearing or the actual violation hearing the first time. In relation to that letter, it's dated June 11th.

Are you speaking to why they couldn't attend the meeting? I'm sorry? Are you speaking to why they couldn't attend the board hearing?

Correct. Okay. So the notice of violation summons to be able to attend a June 21st hearing date was dated June 13th. But the problem is the affidavit of the inspector that says they put that June 13th on the door states that they did it on June 9th, not June 13th. So it becomes an impossibility. How does one post a letter that did not exist at the time they're alleging it existed? In addition to that, we refer back to the photos. The photos suggest June 11th as far as posting of the notice of violation and the summons being posted June 13th. So I don't know what happened there, and I'm not saying anything nefarious happened. Perhaps there was a mistake. The inspector posted these notices, then went back to the office, drafted, and forgot to take the photos. They came the weekend. took those photos. Regardless, my client just did not have the notice. And I would like to share a little bit of her background.

So if I may say, the notices were, actually, the posting is a courtesy. The certified mailings went out. And that's what's required.

So that brings me to that next point that I was going to bring up in relation to the certified mailing. The affidavits both say that it was by first-class mail. The UPS tag, USPS tag, Suggest it's certified, but yet there's no tracking history on any of the letters sent. In addition to that. You mean there's no tracking number?

That's because it's from 2022. USPS only holds information for two years. So if you pull those numbers up, you're not going to be able to find it online.

Understood. I'm not saying that it wasn't sent. Right.

And all it's required to do is be sent. It's a mailbox rule. Right.

Yeah, and that's why I'm... Right, right. I'm not alleging... No, I know you're not doing it, but see, I have to listen very closely because when you say something that the city didn't do its job, we pay attention to that. And then we also got to make sure we're doing our due diligence. And that's why that follow-up question, meaning that there's no tracking number because it expires after two years. So we just have to listen very closely to what you're saying. Understood. We're not saying you're saying anything either. We're just listening very closely.

Understood. And by no means is my argument here today suggesting in any way that the city did not do its job. We believe that they did do their job. The problem is it goes back to the notice and reasonableness of that notice. If these letters were mailed out June 9th, as the affidavit suggests, providing a June 10th correction time frame is a one business day. So those letters had to have been sent next day just for a client to receive it at that PO Box if the PO Box would have been received at that time. So after the violation, after the hearing that was missed, this issue stayed dormant until April of this year. There was another inspection on April 1st, which was brought up to my client's attention that, hey, you still have this violation and you're racking up daily fees. As soon as she was actually physically made aware of that notice, and I'm not suggesting that she was required to have notice, just her position, she immediately took steps to take care of it. By April 8th, it was complied with. By April 9th, the city had confirmed- April of what, this year? 2026, yes. Right. That's why the fine is so high. So that's why we're here today we wanted to bring up the notice issue. The City of Miami website on the facts section says that reasonable time, even though it's not defined, generally is about 30 days. Our issue was, well, we were provided one business day at best. So no matter how minor the issue was of that violation to cure, one business day, and I believe it landed on a Friday where this correction had to be made, I don't believe that was just sufficient time. Because even when my client was brought up to speed in April of this year, it still took her about seven days to get it done. And she did get it done. We're in full compliance now in relation to what we're here on today. So that's why we're requesting mitigation here.

So to be clear, it's not a minor issue. These laws were all enacted after the numerous deaths up in Broward County at the nursing home.

Correct.

And these are ALFs operated out of home. You're supposed to treat it as a single family home. That's why they, you know, or duplex. And that's why for purposes of these type of mitigations, they do get the consideration to be mitigated as a single family home or duplex that's not homestead exempt. So 10,000 to zero is your option. Again, it's not minor to comply with the law should the power go out. to have the required electrical backup hookup with your propane tanks that have to be delivered. None of this is minor. Also, under the code, if you have a regular violation, you generally do get 30 days. When you have a life safety violation, and that's what this was, a life safety violation, then we are not required to abide by the 30 days. Also, at the hearing, even though they did not appear at that June hearing, they were still given two months to comply. That order was mailed again to the owner. And so, you know, I'm assuming, I'm guessing they're not receiving their mail, but they had until August 5th to comply. So it's not like then they had the hearing and then they were told no. So they had all of those notices. There's no record of contact to the city for requesting of a reset that they received if they didn't know. We always generally reset those if somebody has an issue legitimately that they bring. Furthermore, there's 30 days to appeal. No appeal was given to appeal the notice. So any notice argument now is already waived. They failed to appeal. We know that they did receive it. We know that they're admitting that it was posted on the property. They knew it was posted on the property. They had notice. If it was late, obviously you have 30 days to appeal it. They also had 60 days or so to, or just under 60 days to comply, that didn't happen. On the other hand, they have come into compliance, which is excellent. And so I believe you guys have already dealt with ALFs, these in a very particular way, all of them the same way. I'm not stepping on your toes. Again, it's the minimum is 10,000 or all the way to zero.

And thank you for the background and the coloring of that history there. So yeah, we deal with this all the time. We know what it is. And so all out of wash, your client's looking for, and is your client's going to be moving, so is it still operating as is? Still operating as an ALF to this business.

Understood. Just one last thing, and please correct me if I did not receive it via email when I requested the documents, that final enforcement notice, I don't know if within that file it's provided the tracking number or proof of actually sending. I don't know if that's the case when it comes to that because the June 8th and the June.

Those aren't certified mail. Those are just regular mail.

Yeah. Okay.

That I can tell you. That's just regular mail. Got it. It's not a certified mail.

Gotcha. Any questions?

Yeah. When your client purchased the property, was he aware of the violations?

So that's a little bit of a back story because the house was purchased when she was still with her ex-husband. They owned the properties 50-50. There was a divorce in between. Husband retained 1% of interest in that property until the properties paid off as part of the divorce agreement. That 1% controlled the PO box, controlled essentially the mailings, the registered agent. We believe there was some miscommunication there, perhaps, who did an intent. It doesn't matter. We're not making excuses. That's why we're here today for the mitigation. Now she owns it 100%. It's still working as an ALF. At the time this violation occurred, I believe she got 100% of it in December or November of 2022. Is it a duplex? It's, I believe, yeah, so the duplex with Okay.

Yes, it's a duplex.

It's a duplex. Is she living on the property as well? No, it was an ALF.

No, it's just an ALF. So it's treated just like any other duplex or single-family home because they're required to live in a family setting. So you don't treat it any differently even though it's operated as an ALF.

How many residents?

I mean, how many tenants? I don't know the intricacies of the business because she is just essentially the landlord. Okay. The ALF is the business that rents the property.

They can have one per room as far as I know. Okay. I mean, I...

I would make a motion to reduce it to $10,000.

Second that. Second on that. Any other discussion? No. All those in favor? Aye. So discount of $661,500. Thank you very much. You're more than welcome.

Page 155, property address 1701 Northwest 19th Avenue, case number 00021880.

What page? Okay. Good evening. This is a single family home. It's now owned by a corporation.

Okay.

It does not have homestead exemption. The lien ran to $193,250. So the minimum is $10,000 or down to zero by a unanimous vote. But it does not have homestead exemption. No, it's now owned by 1701 Northwest 19th Avenue LLC.

Gotcha. Good evening.

Good evening.

State your name and address for the record.

My name is Yosef Madar.

Okay.

And my sister... My name is Gannit Kat. I'm the owner of the property. Okay. Good evening.

Good evening. All right.

You want to tell us why you... Good evening, Your Honorable Panel, Your Honor. To tell you the truth, I'm a little terrified standing here before you this evening because It all started when we purchased the property in June 22. I wrote the things, so please bear with me two minutes just so I could not forget things. So I'm a real estate broker in Broward County, and I convinced my sister to purchase a property for her retirement home in Miami. It had been an abandoned property, severely abandoned and neglected property for approximately two years. And she did not create these conditions and she never ignored them. From the beginning, she worked in good faith to rescue and rehabilitate the property.

When did she buy it?

In May 2022. May 2022. when on June there was this big huge... And her name is again? I'm sorry? Her name? The Gannit Katz.

Oh, okay. All right. So she's been the owner the whole time. Just changed from her name to corporate names.

Right. She lives in New York.

All right. I just wanted to make sure that she was the owner. She's the owner. Okay. At the time.

What initially appeared to be a cleanup project became an overwhelming financial and emotional ordeal. Major plumbing, roofing, structural problems were discovered. Squatters that we had to remove by a SWAT team, law enforcement assistance. Contractors accepted deposits and disappeared without completing work. Despite every setback, my sister did not walk away. She borrowed approximately $230,000. She has two PACE loans, one Hero, one PACE, and another private loan. to correct the property satisfied the city requirements. Today, the property is fully compliant. All permits are closed. All finals inspections have been approved. There is no open safe structure order. There's no occupancy restrictions or violation notices. The property is safe, compliant, and ready for occupancy. My sister received no financial benefit from this delay. On the contrary, she assumed tremendous debt and suffered significant financial hardship while trying to save the property. The continuing penalty is preventing her from moving forward with prospective tenant in adding another financial burden as she already done everything required to bring the property into compliance. This was never a case of an owner refusing cooperation or deliberately ignoring the law. I've been in contact with Officer Aquino the whole time. I thought she would be here today. My sister is trying to protect her retirement, correct the severely distressed property, overcome unexpected crisis after another. The purpose of code enforcement has been now accomplished, the violations have been corrected, the permits are closed and inspections are approved and property ready for occupancy. We respectfully ask the Magistrate to consider the complete document history, Gannit's extraordinary financial sacrifice and her good faith efforts to bring the property into full compliance. Please allow her to move forward. We respectively request all accumulated monetary fines to be waived, reduced, mitigated, subject only to... And I have so much more to add. We even have an arborist report. Your attorney, is there still... Is there still violations on the trees?

Well, you wouldn't be here today if there was any violations. I don't know.

Well, that's not necessarily the case. I don't know. You're here on this. I don't know. That's for another time to discuss. That's not for here or now.

You're looking for mitigation, right? Yes. Okay, you put out a significant amount of money to correct everything. Absolutely. All right, let me ask you what the board thinks about what they want to do with this.

What's the current status of the property? Is she renting it? Is it empty?

No, it's vacant now. It's vacant? It's been vacant for three years. We've been full efforts into... Is this retirement income? Making it, yeah, to bring it, you know, closed permits. And it was plumbing and electricity and... The whole house is all new.

Okay, and what's your plan with the property? Are you planning to move there and retire, or are you going to rent it? Ultimately.

Is it livable? Can anybody live in the property now? Is the property livable?

Yes. Full compliant.

I mean, I... Can I get a motion? Yeah, I mean, I would make a motion to reduce it to zero.

I'll support it. Yeah, I'll second that motion. Thank you. So I got a motion, zero, I got a second. All those in favor? Aye. Thank you. Wait for your paper over there, okay?

Appreciate you guys.

Thank you for coming.

This took a big toll on the whole family for three years. We understand. And it's come to an end. Thank you all. Appreciate it.

Add on one. Property address 4885 Northwest 7th Street. Case number CE-2021-005031.

This property is a vacant lot. It was here in July. There were two other, it has two other connecting lots that were on. This one wasn't on it yet because for some reason it just, it wasn't complied even though it was complied. So we needed to get it complied so we could put it on. They had the bankruptcy going on. Anyway, it was $447,250. The minimum was $7,500. The other two lots were lower to $7,500.

Got it. State your name and address for the record.

Good evening. My name is Martin McCarthy. I represent 7 at Blue Lagoon 1 and 2 and Caroline Weiss, the managing member.

Okay. And so you're okay with the $7,500 mitigation? I am, sir. Thank you very much. Can I get a motion?

Yeah. Move to reduce to $7,500.

Second. All those in favor? Aye. Thank you. Thank you very much, sir. Appreciate the board's time. Thank you. Next case.

The next constituent has two cases, one on page 149, property address 301, Northeast 58th Street, case number 00058004. The second one is on page 152, property address 301, Northeast 58th Street, case number 00080857. Good evening.

All right, you'll state your name and address for the record.

My name is Danny Sagali. My apologies. I had a terrible accident and I have metal plates. Understood. And screws, so I apologize for not speaking clearly.

Okay. Maybe we can help you with some questions real quick. Right.

So the lien on the 04 case went to $220,750. On the 157 case went to $344,000. This is a triplex now?

It's an empty, complete, flat lot. Have you completely... Yes. Everything's gone? Everything is gone. Let me check.

We just, when did this get, we have our, it's finaled, okay. I guess the last time I looked at it, it wasn't finaled yet. So, all right. So for both of them, it's a vacant lot. It was a triplex before.

Since I bought it for the first time, it was a duplex. The moment I closed the loan, I've never collected a paycheck.

It's okay. The minimum is $7,500 per lot. It's going to be cheaper than the other way anyway. Right. That's all I'm doing. Vacant lot, minimum $7,500 each. Is that better?

Yes. I would love to just show what has happened to the place. Squatters all the time, removing windows, removing doors. I hadn't had electricity for three years. I got chased with a machete. The police came five times. It's been the worst experience of my life. If I could show you the pictures and have the dates, everyone would be We can understand.

I understand. Terrified.

It's a great thing to know that I don't have a headache anymore, but I've been still paying the loan since the moment I purchased it. Yeah.

And, Madam Attorney, there's no mechanism to consolidate these, right? They have to be separate? No, it's separate. It has to be. Okay.

Or violations.

then I would move to reduce 58004 to 7500 and case 80857 to 7500. All those in favor?

Aye. Thank you very much. You're more than welcome, sir. Wait for your paperwork there, okay? Thank you.

No more mitigation. I do have this last special appearance. They checked in?

They checked in? Yes. Okay.

On page 161, property address 7800 Northeast 10th Court, case number 00121510. Hold on. Hold on one second.

Oh, yeah. We're being told she doesn't have standing.

Oh, then it can't be heard.

No, it can't be heard. Let's move on.

Just call 2B Hertz. So just for the record, she advised me that she is the prior owner. She doesn't have a power of attorney. And I explained to her that the current owner has to give her a power of attorney, even though the violation occurred while she was the owner.

Right.

Because the violation is with the property, not with the owner.

Correct. Thank you.

And ma'am, when you get that authority, come on, I'm going to give you my card. When you get something from that other person, please email me so that we can put you on a quicker calendar so when you come back, you can get it done.

Yeah, and we'll do the same thing, another special appearance. Yeah, we could do another one, but to be heard.

So this attorney has two cases on the calendar. The first one is on page 70. Property address 1074 Northeast Little River Drive, case number 00153504. The other one is on page 112. Property address 1076 Northeast Little River Drive, case number 00169130.

Good evening.

Good evening. State your name and address for the record. Sure. Daniel Millian. Yep. Here on behalf for the property at 1074 Northeast Little River Drive and 1076 Northeast Little River Drive. And how does the property plead? We're going to plead guilty. Okay.

I don't know if we want to do both of these cases together. Do you want to just?

We could separate them or put them together, either however you.

Just for the sake of time, if it makes sense to do.

We can do them both for time purposes.

Are you pleading guilty to the other case as well? Yes. Thank you for the record.

So just for a little background, there's been sort of an ongoing issue. Hopefully things will settle down now. As of today, well, prior to today, some of the platform had been removed. One was still remaining. Council and I had a discussion earlier today. And then one of the other ones went down. That wasn't from a platform, but was a personalized website for both of the properties. Because this kind of goes together.

Correct.

The 1074 property, which is on, that's the one thing I didn't write down here. The 1074 property. Northeast Little River.

Yeah.

Is on page 70. Correct. And the 1076 property, I'm just going to write it here. 112. Is 112. 112. So on the 1074 property, that is a repeat violation property from a April of 2025 case under case number 00120558. So I just needed to put that on the record. I have spoken with council in advance. There's also, council was here for one of the neighbors, and I don't know if he wants to, I believe he did want to come up and just address you for a little bit after we discuss certain things, which I know that you generally do allow people to do that. In this particular instance, I just want to go through what we discussed, that it's going to be a finding of guilt. There's going to be a 30-day compliance date on this, but it's going to be a little different, so probably going to have to do a specialized order for it. But for both of them, it's going to be the 30 days. For the 1074 property, it would be a which is the repeat violation property, it would be $1,000 a day. For the 1076 property, because it is a home being used in a commercial fashion, it would be a $500 a day per diem fine. Now, the caveat being that at 30 days, the city will be reviewing everything that's online as well as with not just this neighbor, but there's a couple of other neighbors that have been in contact with the city see what's going on on the property to make sure things are going we may not comply it on day 30 but if nothing's going on we certainly won't file a non-compliance and we're going to make sure that it continues in that fashion since we've had the previous issues should obviously after that 30 days something happened that shouldn't be happening we'll be coming back here on a report status with them to have them come here and discuss irreparable harm fines as well at that point.

Is that for the 1076?

That's for both of the properties. Right. So this is going to be for both of the properties.

But the 1074?

The 1074 and the 1076.

But the 1074 is already a repeat.

The 1076 is the repeat.

And so we tend to try to send a message for a repeat violation.

Right, well, that's where the $1,000 a day will certainly come in, whatever else. I know council wants to address you as well. I just sort of wanted to give you the parameters. It's a little different than normal, but as you know, sometimes we get certain of these cases that have those issues and we sort of, you know, we try to fashion something to keep everybody on the ball and also create a cooling down period, but also knowledge that This, you know, this case isn't just going to automatically close out so that we have to build a whole new case.

Right.

Right. If if if they because that happens too often. And obviously we have something from 2025. So rather than allowing that to occur, this case will remain open and it may may remain open 30, 60 or even 90 days after that initial 30 days just as a watch that we wouldn't file. an affidavit of noncompliance unless they were not in compliance, right? But that case would remain open. Both of them would remain open so that if something does happen, we will come back here and we will move for further sanctions.

Thank you for that.

From the board. And I think maybe that's an easier way to go about things with something like this. And it sort of keeps it around for, you know, maybe four or five months to, you know, see what goes on. But at least something. And then if you would, we do have a neighbor who's come here also to address you.

Thank you. You want to? Do you have anything you want to say?

I think Ms. Dooley has said everything. One of the things is that 1076, they do live on that particular property, so they will be complying with anything dealing with Miami 21 and anything dealing with the property. All right, no problem. Right.

We have discussed certain things, and I will put on the record that council did let me know, and this is the attorney for Mr. Castell. Faber-Castell. Faber-Castell. I just want to make sure I said it correctly. Mr. Faber-Castell. that there is a Sweet 16 party that's going to be happening at which address?

1076, I believe.

At 1076, which is his niece.

The resident, okay. It's his daughter.

Daughter, oh, I'm sorry. That was Mike. All right. And so we just said let them know the date. That way we're going to know, you know.

Understood. Yeah, and Madam Attorney, just to be clear, so the fines would only trigger if an affidavit of non-compliance is filed.

Non-compliance, that's correct.

But we're going to run the clock.

But for the 1074 property, the fines would revert back to their original date of violation, and that would be on January 27 of 2026. Thank you. So let's say time went by and we're 60 days out and something happens. then we have an issue of whether or not, or 28 days from now, there's some crazy rental going on, and we file an affidavit of noncompliance, it would run 1,000 days starting January 28th of 2026.

And one last question before I allow them to speak here. Do we have the ability, now seeing that you've introduced it in this manner, to keep these type of cases open longer than 60 days? And the reason why I'm asking that is because folks take down websites, they take down listings, they do all of the little runaround stuff, and then when they think no one is looking, they pop it right back up. Or they do it on another website. And I know our inspectors are really good at finding them, and so instead of closing out cases, like we just mentioned, The fact that it's still open longer, maybe we set it for 120 days, and anything happens in between, we revert right back because that's intentional at that point. Right.

I do think as a board you have the authority to do that. Thank you. That's what I want to make sure.

Yeah.

and to try to fashion remedies that not only will work for the people who are the owners of the properties, but also work for the people around those properties too, that maybe to try to provide a little extra assurance that there is a mechanism to return to should there be an issue, or maybe even for a violating property owner to be able to come back and go, oh, absolutely not, that's not what happened, and here's everything that was going on. You know what I'm saying? So that might provide a better option for that.

Correct.

I think it is outside. I'm not going to say it's outside the norm, but we have our normal operation of regular things, but we also have cases that are different, like those ALF cases.

Correct.

Those were handled in a different fashion. They had their own hearings. Everything else was going on with fire here, certain violations. When Zika was very high, We had a very different process for businesses that had a lot of open standing water and especially tire companies, things like that. So I do think that you do, but it has to be within the bounds of compliance, notice, and due process.

Well, thank you for that. Because if not, I was going to get clarity from commission and I was going to at least mention it that. Maybe this is a mechanism.

If we can actually handle that here, I would like to make a motion. We can, but before we do anything... No, I don't think you have to make a motion to add that.

It's just, if it's part of your ruling, that's how it will be addressed. I think your counsel is nodding his head. Yeah.

Gotcha. And just as an extra also, I mean, the real... They've already been listed for months now to be long-term leased, you know, for a year plus. I got you. We're trying to... No, no, I got you.

We're just using this as a test case. Gotcha. Madam Attorney?

Good evening. My name is Mary Ann Ruiz. I represent Mr. Faber-Castell, who's been the one behind a lot of violations because the property is directly across from his home. Okay. And this is another neighbor. Thank you, sir. For the record... Mm-hmm. We would love if you would issue fines now for the repeat property. That would be wonderful. The city has done a fantastic job and in getting here today and preparing and there was a slideshow and everything ready had they not pled guilty on the property. So we would gladly accept at least a repeat violation of a fine of some sort on the repeat violation.

I think you mean an irreparable harm fine.

Yes. In addition to everything else that was discussed. And we very much appreciate your questions and concern on the issue. And if Mr. Freiburg-Castell wanted to say a couple of words.

Yes. Yeah. Dear members of the board, Madam Attorney, thank you very much for the opportunity to speak before you here. I'm going to keep it somewhat brief, but I'll put it in a structure of three things. One is the scale, that this is not just a case of home sharing, renting out a small apartment. These are two large waterfront properties with recurring people coming in every weekend, luggages, commercial boat charters. Even on the website of the owner, that's how it's marketed, concierge services. So it's substantial, you know, at $3,500 a day, you know, for a weekend, both properties, $20,000 a weekend. So that's the scale. The second topic is the continued noncompliance. Despite your efforts, the violation letter of January 2026, with the request to comply by January 28th, that has not happened. It's not just my observations, it's also the publicly available information, the bookings, everything, we've seen that. And so that has not led to lasting compliance. And that's all I want is for these properties to come into compliance. And lastly, and most importantly to me personally, is the impact. And the impact, not only for the neighbourhood, but for me, is very real. I bought my property a year ago. It was the biggest joy for my wife. And since this has been happening, It's been a big significant source of anxiety, stress, frustration for her. And it's been very difficult. And maybe one small personal example, you know, it's a waterfront property. My son's biggest passion is fishing. And he loves fishing off the dock. And when we moved there, he was very excited to do that. But with numerous encounters of strangers and intoxicated individuals coming off of charter boats, he doesn't enjoy doing that anymore. And I can tell you as a father, there's nothing more heartbreaking than to see your son not enjoy doing something that he once really loved to do. So I ask you just to consider whatever A decision to make to ensure that it is meaningful because the scale is substantial and I think it needs to be a measure that the only sensible outcome is compliance and not doing this because it has an impact on families in the neighborhood. Thank you very much. Sir, did you want to put something on record as well?

Sure, just very briefly, Ross Romash, 1133 Bellmead Island Drive, and I also own other properties on the island. I lived in 1133 Bellmead Island Drive. One of the reasons that we moved out was because of his actions. Continuously for I can't tell you how many years I believe we're going back. I mean many many years He's running a full straight-on business. I lived through it. I saw the charters I saw the different bachelorette parties, you know all this isn't he's been doing this for that long my concern as a resident somebody, you know long-term Miami resident is you guys say you're gonna fine him but quite frankly he's getting four thousand dollars a night okay he's making very likely a million and a half dollars a year or something in that range off of this business one other thing I want to get on record they said that he lives in the one thing that it's separate okay that may be so but more often than not he's renting it out so I don't consider that I want to be very crystal clear On Bellmead Island, we had the Petrozza case, okay? And I'm sure you guys are familiar.

We can't go back. You need to stick with from January of 2026 to now.

The bottom line is we're never going to go away. He's never going to be able to do this without me personally. I'm willing to spend whatever it takes. He's willing to spend whatever it takes. You have ruined people's lives.

Sir, you do not address them. I understand, but...

I apologize. Thank you. I apologize. All right. Literally ruined some of my family's life. And we had to move out of the house because of him. Okay. Thank you.

Thank you. Thank you for that. And thank you, Inspector. See, Madam Attorney, this is why I was asking about having it kept open because, you know, we found ourselves as a board having where a case has gone to the leverage circuit. It's come back. We didn't articulate certain points or anything. diligence and it's like you know we're faced with residents who are coming before us you know having dealt with not just a one-off but a repeat like a repeat repeat and so this is a situation where we're just like you know wanting to keep that open is I think it's something that would strengthen down the line what we're trying to do and because if this does go back to January of this year 28 then that's more than what an irreparable harm fine would be, and there's no mitigation to that.

So... That is correct.

Yeah. So, I'm just talking to the attorney right now. No, that's me.

I wasn't saying anything. The only difference, and I know you mentioned the appeal that we discussed a few months ago, the only difference here is that it appears he's taking responsibility for it. So he's admitting to the underlying facts that give rise to the violation, which is one of the issues that the appellate court had with the prior... Airbnbs. If you want to impose an irreparable harm, you have to make findings above and beyond his admission of guilt.

I agree. We definitely understand that, but here's the thing. Everybody does, when they are caught, they do come before a magistrate, a judge, or whatever, and everybody wants sympathy at that point, but no one was thinking about it when it was going on. I understand exactly what you're saying, but that's why we As a boy, when we have residents that come out before us and telling their stories about what they're living through, that's the other side of the story that no one gets told. And so we have to respect that. We have to appreciate those comments as well. And so it's just a matter of going beyond just what an irreparable harm find is. It's like, what sends a message? What says it's not accepted at all in the city of Miami? So it's a good conversation to have. It's good to see on both sides. I'm glad to understand that. They're acknowledging certain things, but they're not the only ones. And I don't want their example to be something that says it's okay. As long as we become heartfelt about what we're doing wrong and acknowledge it, that's okay. But there's consequences for that too, though.

So there's one thing I want to address. And I was thinking about it after I was nodding my head. And it's this concept of keeping a code enforcement case open in possibly perpetuity.

Correct.

In perpetuity.

I understand. I'm putting it out there because I want to verify that whatever you guys do is at least sustainable and will deliver the message, so to speak, that you're trying to send a violator. And I don't want a challenge to something. I want to make sure. I just want to verify it. I don't think there's anything inappropriate of what you're doing right now, but I want to make sure that if you want to continue to do this, as a possible tool that there's parameters and we follow those parameters.

I would love to get more conversation on that as well because I think it is something that we, considering what tools we currently have, considering what the law has said based on the other different court rulings, you know, our hands are kind of tied in some regards, but then in others we can do certain things too. And so I know the residents that are watching, that are listening, you know, they're petitioning their commissioners to do something as well. So, This is the body that may be able to do it. Inspector, or? What is it? Yeah, so what do we want to do with this one here? What's the recommendation? Well, we have that.

So if you want to consider, as you asked the question, and they did bring up an irreparable harm fine for... or 1074, you've obviously heard testimony with respect to what's going on. We would need to put on specifically what's happening with 1074. I believe that's one away from the neighbor's house. 1076 is in between Mr. Faber-Castell's house and 1074. We can certainly... I was showing you those documents. If you wanted to do that, the requirement is based upon the gravity of the violation, the action taken by the violator to correct it, and then any previous violations that have been committed. So those are your three findings for that. I think there have been issues in the past, as your counsel said with respect to You know, the difference in pleas, but I think also the difference in amounts.

Correct.

You know, we had some of them that automatically went to the top. And so I think that that was something that the appellate court just kind of thought that seems a bit much. Yeah. To be, you know, somebody walks in and then boom, it's $15,000. See you later. You know, that kind of thing. So I think that that was, I think that that was...

was an issue, but those are the three factors.

Five would be reasonable.

Madam Attorney, on the 1074 property, there was violations prior to January 2026, which is what's causing it to be a repeat offender.

Right, so the case was... Can I ask one question with the attorney from... So this violation is from January 28. Are you aware of any other events that have gone on since then?

Yes.

That's all I needed.

Right. So I'm going to... That's all I needed. This is the property. This is the... I'm going to show you. It's... Everything's already... Yeah, yeah. We have a plain gilt, so... Yeah. Just so you can identify the property. The red dot, you can look at your screen. I see it. That's 1074... I've got this to the right. That's Mr. Faber-Castillo's property, and that's 1076. So these are the two properties. The repeat violation property is the 1074 property. The one wherein the property owner states is his residence is the middle property. So the property was cited in... on January 27th of 2026.

So we can certainly take you to photographs from May of 2026.

These are photographs that were provided by our neighbor that have been verified. We have from May 28th through 31st.

We have the- I'm sorry, what is this? I can't see this.

These are the photographs Of people coming and going from 1074. Since.

Since. After. They asked about after. Yeah. After January. After you first were notified. Of 2026. For the repeat.

So we have May. Then we have a June 4th through June 7th.

Is this for 1074 or 1076?

This is 1074.

This is 1074.

It looks like some guy appeared. This is 1074. It looks like some guy appeared to be throwing something at one of the cameras.

But that property is the 1074 property, the blue roof.

So in other words, so since the notice of violation, which made it now a repeat, it's also still been continued activity since the notice. Based on the time stamps and the dates on the pictures.

And we provided these photographs? This is the first time that I see these.

These are from our inspector.

These are from the city?

These are city. So this is from, this is a part of the... documents that we're submitting.

This is by the inspector?

No, we have photographs from inspectors. We have photographs from the neighbors as well.

Some of these are neighbors' photographs. This is the neighbors' photographs.

With time stamps. Hold on, wait. We don't want to do this right now. What we want to do is, because trust me, what I'm trying to establish here is that if you acknowledge what you've already said, that you guys are guilty, and you're going to stop doing it.

Yes, we're already in compliance. Then watch this.

Then in 60 days, 90 days, there's no repeat, anything going on, we'll close it out, right? We might push it to 120 days, just for the sake of, right? And we'll close it out. But should something happen on the 110th day, right? The fine goes back to January. That's fair. That's $1,000 a day.

We understand.

That's our irreparable harm right there.

Okay.

Okay? So we're trying to find a balanced approach to this and understand that you want to be compliant, and so we want to hold you to that. That's perfect. So we're not trying to do this back and forth thing. We're trying to find the best way forward, but we're serious about what we're saying because some of us want to just do irreparable harms, and every single time you come, we stack it with an irreparable harm every single time. We understand.

And that's fine. And we would address it at a separate hearing if something were to happen.

Because we've had issues also with these particular neighbors. If you're saying you're serious about it and we push it out in 120 days and you do it at an event the next week, you're not serious. And that will let us know. So when we do the things that we need to do, we will have all of the reasoning available. that the 11th Circuit Court is asking us to provide to say why we're doing what we're doing. Okay, and that's fine. I just want, I understand.

I just, just also for the record, there's been issues with this particular neighbor. It's kind of a little bit of a personal vendetta and there's issues that have, you know, certain videos and things and we've called the police and so I just, and that's fine.

No, we understand that. But if you're doing the activities that they're saying you're doing and they're taking pictures of it, that's another thing.

So we'll, we'll, gotcha. Okay.

What's our recommendation? Is it still the... All right.

We'll just do it once more, and then everybody else will be able to get on with their lives. But thank you to the people who are being... Sometimes cases take longer than others. For page 70, the 1074 property, it's a finding of guilt, the minimum 30 days, but as long as 120 days, $1,000 a day. Right? Yeah. Okay. The... It's 112, I believe, the 1076 property. On page 112 is a finding of guilt. Again, 30 days, that could go as long as 120 days with a $500 per diem. Should anything occur during those time periods, we know that the daughter's Sweet 16 party is going on. Let them know. Other than that, if something does go on, we will bring it back immediately to the board at the next hearing date, it will come back.

All right. Anybody, any unreadiness? All right. Can I get a motion?

Yeah, move as stated. Second.

All those in favor? Aye.

Thank you.

Thank you. Thank you. And for the audience, thank you for working with us on this one. This is just a particular thing that happens, and so, you know. Okay. I'm going to keep. I appreciate your understanding.

Page 40, property address 1681 Southwest 10th Street, case number 00159273.

Good afternoon.

State your name and address for the record.

Ramon Gutierrez, 1681 Southwest Street, Miami, Florida. How does the property plead? I'm sorry? How does the property plead?

Guilty. Guilty. Thank you very much. Inspector?

L. Smith, Southeast Office.

What do I need to do?

This is for the remodeling?

Yes, ma'am.

Wait, you just ma'am'd me?

Oh, wow. Let me pull this one up for you. Yeah, just a little bit.

Have they started a permitting process yet?

Yes. Okay.

How much time do you think that they need? 120 days.

So, ma'am, I'm working with the contractor. We are already submitting the permit to the city of Miami. I have the work permit number. It should be a number of two or three weeks. So I'm working on it to get it resolved.

Can I get a motion?

So we'd recommend reside at the property?

Ma'am?

Do they reside at the property?

Yes, I live there with my daughters.

Okay, so the recommendation would be 120 days to start. If you need more time, take the piece of paper. Don't forget to request the extension of time for sure, and then it will be $150.

Thank you. So move for a finding of guilty.

I think he had a question. What was it?

Yes, unofficially requesting an extension to get this resolved.

We're giving it to you right now. Yeah. Right. I didn't hear it. There's another paper there if you want more time.

You're going to get 120 days from today. Thank you. Put in your phone a little reminder, an alarm to go off in 110 days. Tomorrow starts day one. To remind you, if you don't have your affidavit of compliance from Inspector Smith, that you need to request your extension of time first. And then just email bomb her for like days and days and days and see what's up. Okay. Okay. Motion.

Yeah. Move for finding of guilt, 120 days to come into compliance and $150 fine thereafter.

Second. All those in favor. Aye. Thank you. Next case.

Page 22, property address 1345 Southwest 17 Terrace, case number 00150096. Hamilton.

Paul C. Collins. Paul Collins.

Going once. 1345 Southwest 17th Terrace.

Going twice.

Pass it.

Pass. Next case. Thank you, sir.

Next case. Page 38, property address 3695 West Flagler Street, case number 00157993.

Good evening, sir. Is this CVS?

Yes.

Thank you. Good evening. Good evening. State your name and address. Burl Soschin.

Burl Soschin. Thank you. Owner of the property. Okay, great. And this is the manager of the CVS, Hector Torres, who's going to speak on my behalf.

Understood. Is the property guilty or not guilty?

Are we guilty or not?

Guilty. Thank you.

You said yes or no?

Oh, so you're not guilty. All right, so we're going to put on our case, okay, to show you what you did wrong. Okay? Thank you. Inspector?

All right, Inspector, please state your name for the record. Inspector Aguiar. with the north office.

All right, did you put together pages one through 132 for today's hearing?

Yes.

Okay, and on March 6th, you cited the property for fair to maintain the public right away, right up to the edge of the pavement as they're required by law, fair to maintain the exterior of a commercial property as well as the blocking of the street, is that correct? Correct. All right, so, and notice was sent to both the owner and registered agents, but they're present today?

Yes.

Is that correct?

Correct.

All right. Your affidavit of posting is part of this, the summons. You have emails going back with Mr. Soshin.

Is that correct?

Correct. All right. Where you're discussing the violation, the trash that's outside, and the need for the pickup of those things. Is that correct?

Correct.

All right. In terms of the... Here's the other property information. This is the side of the property we're discussing, correct?

Correct.

So there's bits and pieces of garbage on the side, is that correct? Yes. From this way to this way, which is the responsibility of the property owner, yes?

Correct.

That would mean the property owner or the tenant CVS?

Yes. All right. This is our sidewalk area.

This whale here is not maintained. It's now just dirt where it should be grass. Is that correct?

Correct.

All right. We have trash in their hedges. We have trash on the side of the road. There's more trash around it. Here we have more trash on the property. Excuse me?

I'm sorry. Are there more current pictures besides the ones from March?

Yes.

Okay.

There's 100 and something pictures here, so I'm just going to keep going through them.

We have been called up as well after I had opened my case for the same issues. Yeah. Ongoing. It's 38.

We have more, between the electrical grids, we have more trash on the property. The hedges are over the sidewalk. They're not supposed to be over the sidewalk.

They did repair the building and paint it. Okay.

This part, did they comply within 30 days?

Yes.

Okay.

So this part's complied. That was fixed.

That's the 2171.

Yeah. So the remainder. Yeah. So the remainder is the trash. Is that correct? Correct.

And the obstruction blocking the right of way.

Yeah.

Okay.

Hold on. We're getting there. Here's later on in March. Again, now we have standing water in the swale because it's not properly kept, which it's required to be. Garbage in the hedges.

CVS bags.

The next week.

Okay.

Now, we're in April. Sorry, I have to keep moving them around. I apologize.

They did clean it, but it keeps coming back.

Right. Well, they have high-volume traffic and customers who leave trash. Again, the hedges are still going further into the sidewalks.

Trash is still there.

All right, these are your postings, is that correct? Here we have more hedges. Inspector, have you been to the property recently?

Yes.

Is the property in the same or substantially same condition as it was in these photographs?

Similar.

Bits and pieces of garbage on a regular basis around the property, on the property, in the hedges. Have the hedges ever been trimmed?

They did some of them, not everything.

They did some of the hedges? Yes. But not all. Okay. At this time, the city seeks to admit pages 1 through 32 into evidence. Admit it.

Madam attorney have a question in our book here. It says that the violation for failure to maintain public right-of-way was complied on April 4th Is that inaccurate?

They had cleaned it and then we got called again and so it's still in violation Any questions

I mean, I never saw pictures where everything was painted and everything.

I mean, every month. She complied that one. She said that one was done.

And every month they go and do the trimming of all those bushes.

And trust me, we try to keep it clean. But there's so many homeless around there that they just keep, there was a couple of them that they just throw stuff everywhere. We try to call it the cops doing everything, but there's just so much we can do. I understand that. And what about the hedges that continue to grow out?

Okay.

How much time do you think you need to get all that squared away?

Once I go back to work, I put in the call and that's it.

It should be there within less than two weeks.

And the swell area, does that need to be for the garbage? With sod again or the area that's dirt?

Right. Well, you're going to have to fix that area that's dug out, by the way, in the swell. That's going to require a public works permit. to fix that, but if you can keep the, I believe if you can get the hedges cleared out, as well as the greater concern is the little pieces of garbage all over the place, and the problem with that is, just so that you understand, and it's from your customers, it could be from whoever's coming by and somebody throwing it out their car and understanding that, but when we get rains like we have now, everything starts washing through, it all goes into the drains, and then we know where it ends up, right? So even the smallest little fine things start getting out there. And that becomes a big problem for our city and for our water quality. So it's really important for that to get picked up. I don't think we'd have any issues with at least starting with 60 days to work on that. And then if more time is needed, Go ahead and ask for it. But less of a concern is, and I think they can, if all that really gets cleaned up, probably comply this, but you need to also get that swale area taken care of that has the standing water. Okay. That right-of-way will be yours, but it'll be required like a public works permit. But your inspector can help you with that.

Okay. Okay.

Yeah, move for finding of guilty, 60 days to come into compliance, and $250 per diem thereafter.

I got a second. Second. All those in favor? Aye. Aye. Thank you. Thank you. You're more than welcome.

Page 86, property address 3071 Southwest 27th Avenue, case number 00166399.

Good evening. My name is Hugo Delgado on behalf of Cocoa Palm condominium.

Thank you. And how, at the time of the violation, how is the property? Thank you very much. Hi, Inspector.

Please state your name for the record.

Good evening. Inspector Steve Haynes, City of Miami Solid Waste Department.

Okay. What we need here is an enclosure for the solid waste container, right?

That's correct.

All right. What's going on? They working on it?

Okay, yes, we are. We actually have just engaged our engineer plans should be ready for the enclosure no later than Monday, I would say. We do have two contractors. So by the way, no disrespect to the city, we really tried to move the container around. I had waste connections come out and long story short, we can't move it anywhere. So we do have to build an enclosure in that spot. So we should have the engineer plans no later than Monday and we probably should have it wrapped up in about 60 days. And then I have another bigger issue, and I spoke to Mr. Haynes about this. So we just finished our 40-year recertification, and my roofing permit is on hold for the dumpster. And we already have everything ready to go. We have material, but we can't break ground because we have the NOV for the container. And I don't know if there's anything that we can do in the meantime to release that. Whatever we have to do to show good faith, we will do. But we really got to move on the roofing permit. Okay.

How much time are we looking to give them? You haven't filed for the permit yet, have you?

No, we have the plans coming in no later than Monday.

120 days? Yeah, because just to make sure, it's not a big permit, but once they get it, it shouldn't take long for the review. They'll probably be done well before then because it's just for the enclosure and 250.

And his issue that he raised about the roofing permit that's being on hold because of this, is there something we can do about that?

Yes. Once this comes into compliance, a roofing permit, and I'll give you my card, a roofing permit's life safety. Nothing should hold that up. So you take my card, you'll send an email, I'll send it to the building, be like, what's going on? You could even go see the building official, but I might be quicker.

Okay, so I would move for finding of guilty 120 days to come into compliance and $250 fine per diem thereafter.

Second. All those in favor? Aye. Thank you.

Make sure he knows. So it's 120 days, $250 if you need per diem. If you need an extension of time, take the piece of paper.

Yes, I will. Oh, awesome. Thank you guys so much for being so helpful. Mr. Haynes, thank you for being patient.

Thank you. All right, next case.

Page 10, property address 4300 West Flagler Street, Unit 101, case number 00087241.

Good evening.

Hello.

At the time of the violation was the property... Okay, thank you very much. Please put his name on the record. Oh, you don't put your name in there, just on the record for me?

My name's Alfonso Salcinas.

Thank you. Inspector. Inspector.

This is for the CU and BTR.

What's going on?

CU and BTR for unit 101. Correct.

Is there an application?

Yeah, their application is there, but they got to change the use. So that's why it's taking longer than it should be.

So it would be 120, 250 the day thereafter?

We've already submitted the plans. 120 days to start. Give me 120.

You've got to do a change of use. Yeah, yeah, never say no if we're offering probably more than you were thinking about asking for.

I'll take the paper. All right, thank you.

I get a motion. Yeah, move for finding of guilt, 120 days, competent compliance, and $250 fine per diem thereafter.

Mm-hmm. Second. All those in favor? Aye. Thank you. Thank you.

Page 130, property address 6535 Southwest 6th Street, case number 00160012.

Good evening.

Good evening.

State your name and address for the record.

My name is Marfa, 6535 Southwest 6th Street.

And at the time of the violation, is the property guilty or not guilty? Guilty? Guilty. Thank you very much. Inspector?

Maria Sainz, South Office, call compliance.

She pleaded guilty, so what do they need to do?

This just has the windows and driveway left? I'm sorry?

No, this is the watercraft.

Huh?

It's like a watercraft?

No, that part's complied. Okay. Right, with the boat?

It's not on the watercraft.

The boat's moved, right? Yeah, so the boat's not an issue. It's just for the work without, which is...

It's a window door and the driveway.

And the driveway.

Which we're already processing permit. We just got our engineer drawings yesterday completed. They were uploaded today to the portal, so we're already complying with the violation.

All right. 6535 or 6535? 6535.

Oh, 6535.

He was just checking to see where you were. Okay.

Sorry, folks. We're not going to be out of here by 630.

City recommends 120. They are in the obligation correction phase. Thank you.

And do you reside there? No. I have a POA. We're the contracting company. We're the fourth one that they hired.

Does the owner reside there?

Yes. Thank you. That's what matters.

Okay. I didn't know you had a POA. It matters. Yeah.

Move for finding of guilt, 120 days to come to compliance, and $150 fine per diem thereafter.

Second. All those in favor? Aye. Not that you don't matter, but in the sense of the amount of the possible fine. No worries.

Thank you, guys.

All right.

Page 44, property address 3401 Southwest 9th Street, case number 00159905. Good evening.

Good evening, gentlemen of the board. Good to see you again. My name is Paul Savage. I have law offices at 200 South Biscayne Boulevard, and I'm here on behalf of the respondent. And at the time of the violation, I hate to say it, but at the time of the violation, we were guilty, as Inspector Vanessa Pino will tell us. Thank you, sir. Easiest way ever. Inspector. Inspector.

Vanessa Pinoco Compliance, Southeast Office. This is a commercial property. They have been in contact with me. They've been trying to comply. They have made efforts. They did have an issue with a homeless man that was parking his van and putting all his stuff basically inside the property, outside the property, moving it. So police helped me. That was towed. All the stuff was removed. I went by today. They did clean up. So what's... They need to work on it a little bit more, but it's pretty good for now. And then what's missing is they need to paint the building. I know that there's some issues going on with the family and they have been getting estimates to get the painting done. And they are, I believe, also in the process of getting a permit to do the painting since it is a commercial property. So I would suggest 120 days so that they can get their finances in order and get the painting done.

Got it.

Director?

Any objection?

That is correct. The city recommends 120. They are in the inspection phase of the permits. Thank you.

Okay, so move for a finding of guilt, 120 days to come to compliance, and $250 fine per day thereafter.

Second. All those in favor?

Aye. Thank you. Thank you, gentlemen. Thank you, Inspector. Appreciate it. Thank you.

Juan, you coming over? Oh, okay. We'll take a break because we're losing quorum. All right, just give us a few minutes here, folks. We'll get quorum back. 30 seconds. Maybe. I was trying for 6.30, but, you know. Not without, yeah. You know what? Those probably should be special appearances, to be honest with you. Put them at the end. You know, because a case like that, it's too much talking.

3230 Northwest 8th Street, right?

How many more cases? One, two, three, four, five, six. Make it quick.

I think that's where he went.

We're done. We're done. I know, but I have to tell you about this. Good. We're going.

We're going. All right.