Code Enforcement Board - Regular Meeting

Mr. Rango, if you'd like to start us off.

Welcome to tonight's Miami Shores Village Code Enforcement Meeting. This is presided by Chairman Huber. The board members present this evening are all volunteers, residents of Miami Shores Village and your neighbors. The board is charged with enforcing the code and are interested in compliance with the code. Village staff is represented today by Mr. Michael Orta and Mr. Leopold Lewis, who will present all cases in violation of the code on behalf of the village. Village clerk is Ms. Emily Smith, who is responsible for ensuring that you are promptly checked in and also to record today's proceedings. At this time, please ensure that you have checked in with Ms. Smith. Also, please ensure that you have turned off or silenced all cell phone devices. My name is Jose Arango. I am the village attorney in today's hearing. I will be counsel for the village. I will briefly explain what will happen tonight so that you all understand how the hearing works. There are three different types of hearings that will be heard tonight. The first hearing, the penalty hearing and the request for relief. The first hearing is for persons who have been issued a notice of violation and this is your first time coming on that notice of violation. And the issue will be addressed here is whether or not there's a violation of the code. The chair will call each case by address. If your case is called, please come up to the podium and speak directly into the microphone. State your name and relationship to the property. If you dispute the violation, the chair will inquire whether you agree there is a violation or should you present evidence to dispute the violation. If you do dispute the charge, the village will then present its evidence, including any photographs of the violation, and provide testimony of the violation. You have the right to cross-examine the village code officer about any testimony. The board will also question the officer on any testimony as well. You will then have an opportunity to present your evidence to the board and present any relevant evidence. The board will then adjudicate the case by a majority vote and assign a deadline of compliance should you be found guilty. The second type of hearing is a penalty hearing. These hearings are for people who have already been through the first hearing and given a date to cure the violation. The primary issue to be determined by the board is whether or not you met the deadline for compliance. If the violation has not been corrected by that deadline, the board will impose a lien. If you maintain that you cure the violation on time, or if you wish to request more time, the board may hear your testimony. Third type of hearing is the request for relief, also known as a mitigation hearing. At this type of hearing, The persons who have already been through the first and the second hearing and have been found guilty and have incurred fines with a lien and have cured the violation may now seek to settle the accrued fines with the board with an offer of a number less than the full amount of the lien. This is not an appeal process but a settlement negotiation. In this regard, the board will only vote on one proposal per applicant per meeting. As a result of this procedural rule, at some point during this hearing, the chair will ask the property owner a final question. Is this your best and final offer? What is meant by that is, is this the offer that you want the board to vote on? You can raise or lower your offer, but once the board votes on the number proposed, that is the only number that will be considered. At this time, anyone who may provide testimony to the board, please raise your right hand to be sworn in. Do you swear that the testimony... If you're going to give testimony before the board, please raise your right hand. Do you swear that the testimony we'll give today is the truth and nothing but the truth? Thank you.

All righty. Thank you for coming to this evening Code Enforcement Board hearing. This board is empowered to hear evidence in order to reach findings of fact and conclusions of law for the purpose of resolving cases that come before it. A finding of a violation in any case before us may lead to costs being assessed and a daily fine being levied for violations of the village's code of ordinances. The board is always interested in comments or statements that will help us make determination in each case, and we are always interested in compliance rather than levying fines. If you have not already done so, please come forward and give your name to the clerk so that we may know you are here. If there is no objection, we will consider at one time all cases involving the same piece of property. Madam Clerk, would you call roll?

Board member Berryman here board member Rodriguez president board member pearl here board member Han here board member Kanjana Chair Huber here.

All right Madam clerk. Do we have anyone here for notice of violation?

Yes, Jennifer Hornstein 9800 Northeast Fifth Avenue Road have a friend Hornstein

All right, so we have case 1025-324, 9800 Northeast Fifth Avenue Road, code sections 15-8, damaging, defacing village property, code section 15-104, specific noise prohibitation. If you would state your name and address for the record.

Jennifer Hornstein, 9800 Northeast Fifth Avenue Road.

Okay. First, do you agree that there was a violation or is a violation?

I agree there's a violation.

All right. Mike, is this yours?

No, it's Mr. Lewis's, but it was tabled last month. Okay. And I just wanted to – is that how I'm saying it? Yeah. So we met with Mr. Hornstein up to record, and we – he went ahead and agreed with the proposal. Okay. From Mr. Mike Skopstad, our partner.

Okay. Is this is this any different than the previous proposal or is it it's this okay, so we've agreed to the proposal, okay What's your recommendation Okay Okay, so we're gonna

set the violation as and with this is the penalty and okay perfect all right um miss hornstein do you have anything else to add yeah do i have to buy them from you or can i shop them around the trees we explained to mr hornstein that we purchased the trees and we plant the trees and we're going to water the trees but the watering is going to be on us well the planting and the watering is on the city The watering.

And the planting.

Yes, sir. Yeah. But they're paying for the trees and the planting. Who's paying for the trees? Not the water.

You're paying for the trees?

No. No. You.

Right. I'm paying for the trees, but my question is, do I have to buy them from you, or can I get them from somewhere else?

No, we're getting them.

So I have no option to buy them from somewhere else if I could find them cheaper.

Well, I assume it's because they might not buy all 20 at once. They're going to buy a set and install them, buy a set and install them. Well, I think it's only 10.

Well, what was said with Mr. Hornstein is what Mr. Scott's got agreed with, so I can't say anything else outside of that.

Okay.

How long do I have?

What's the recommendation? 30 days. 30 days? Yes.

Are you going to release my permit? I was told that my permit for my driveway was not going to be released until I paid that. Is that correct? Okay. So it's going to be released as soon as I paid this? Is that how that works? You'll release the permit for my driveway, which I've been waiting for?

Well, that's something that the Public Works Department is going to have to address. But I do know that once this is taken care of, they will go ahead and approve the permit so you can install the driveway.

Okay. There's no way to reduce the amount of trees?

That's not my call.

Whose call is it? Mr. Arbust.

Okay. That's it.

All right. Do you have anything else, Dad? No. Okay. Mike, anything else? No. Okay. Do we have a motion? As soon as I get a question answered. Hold on, Barry. Go ahead.

Mike, you said as soon as this is taken care of, then the lady can proceed with her driveway permit. What kind of simply paying payment okay so then they're not going to be delayed if the village needs a week or two or three to get the truth okay thank you all right I'm sorry any other questions or comments from the board that was my fault for skipping okay do we have a second sure second okay very second madam clerk would you call roll

Board Member Congenial?

Yes.

Board Member Berryman? Yes. Board Member Rodriguez? Yes. Board Member Pearl? Yes. Board Member Hahn? Yes. Chair Huber?

Yes. All right. Thank you very much. Madam Clerk, do we have anyone else present for notice of violation?

No, sir. All right.

At this time, Chair observes that there have been no appearance by anyone on behalf of the alleged violators in connection with case numbers 08252370925282, 1025325, 1025336, and case 1025345. Mr. Director, the case files on each of these matters contain affidavits attesting to the existence of the code violations alleged and demonstrating proper notice to the alleged violator of tonight's hearing.

They do, Mr. Chair.

At this time, I will entertain a motion for summary adjudication. Motion for summary.

You want to do it?

Yeah.

You got your script?

Oh, no. Okay. Script it out. Mr.

Chair, I move for summary adjudication of all such cases to include a finding of fact and a conclusion of law that a violation exists as charged in the respective notice of violations issued. In each such case, the offending party shall correct the violations within the time period specified by staff in the staff recommendations for these hearings and immediately notify the code enforcement officer when the property is brought into compliance. In each such case, if the violation is not brought into compliance, within such time period, the code enforcement officer may report this fact back to the board in accordance with the board's rules and regulations, at which time a fine is hereby authorized to be automatically assessed against the violator in the respective daily amounts specified in staff's recommendations for tonight's hearing retroactive to the original compliance deadline. which will constitute a lien on the property of the violator. Further, in respect to each such case, costs in the amount specified in staff's recommendations for tonight's hearing are hereby assessed in order to recoup the village's expenses in prosecuting the violations to date.

Do I have a second? Second. All right, we have a second. Any further discussion? Madam Clerk, would you call roll?

Board Member Hahn?

Yes.

Board Member Pearl? Yes. Board Member Rodriguez? Yes. Board Member Berryman?

Yes.

Board Member Cangiano?

Yes.

Chair Hubert?

Yes. All right. Thank you. Madam Clerk, is anyone present for a penalty?

Yes.

All right.

You have Joaquin Pineros, 182 Northwest 96th Street.

Okay. It's the second one on there. All right. So we are here for case. First, state your name and address for the record.

Joaquin Pineros, 182 Northwest 96th Street.

What's your relation to the property? I'm the owner. Oh, okay, because we have a different name. All right. Case 0525127, Code Section 12-133, Unsightly House Exterior. First, do you agree that there is a violation? Yes. All right. Louis, Leopold, do you want to start us off?

Yes, sir. Leopold Louis presenting for the village. Case number 05-25-127, property address 182 Northwest 96th Street. Unknown record Joaquin Pineros Maria Velazquez. Violation is 12-133, on site the house exterior. The corrective action was to clean and maintain the roof. The case was created on 5-14-2025, and the deadline was 11-24-2025, and still no compliance.

All right. Do you have anything to add?

Yes. We complied with the sidewalk. We cleaned the sidewalk. This is an old house that we purchased to build our new home. We applied for the RRSP, and it was granted. It was delayed. for some reason in the city. We were granted that last week, and the house is coming down. So basically, I have all that. I'm a general contractor as well. This house is going to be for me. I have all the package after the RSP was approved, and we are submitting tomorrow for a full demolition part.

All right. Is 30 days enough to have the demo complete?

It depends on the time that the city takes to approve the permit. I would say so, but in my experience now with the holidays, it would take a little longer for that.

Yeah, okay. Well, what I would say is my recommendation to the board would be to give them another 30 days, and if you need more time, you need to talk to Mr. Lewis before, not after.

Perfect. That's fine.

Yeah. As long as you're in contact, everything will be fine.

Yeah, we should be submitting permit tomorrow.

Okay. Do we have any other discussion?

60 days then?

No, I'd like to keep it at 30. It keeps the fire under the feet to make sure everybody's moving. On the 25th day, if you need more time, you just got to talk. That's all.

That's fine.

All right. Any other comment from the board? All right. Do we have a motion? So moved. All right. Do we have a second? Second. All right. Madam Clerk, would you call roll?

Board Member Cangiano? Yes. Board Member Berryman?

Yes.

Board Member Rodriguez? Yes. Board Member Pearl? Yes. Board Member Hahn?

Yes. All right. All right.

Anyone else present for enforcement order?

Yes. Steve Berry, 479 Northeast 102nd Street. All right.

All right, please state your name and address for the record.

Steve Berry, 479 Northeast 102nd Street.

Okay, so we have case 0524319, code section 2017A and B, owner's responsibility taking care of Parkway, code section 64A, unauthorized construction expired permits. Mr. Lewis, this is your case too?

Yes. All right, start us off, please.

Actually, I'm sorry, Mr. Berry, do you agree that there is a violation? No. Okay.

YOU KNOW, I GOT TO APOLOGIZE FOR THAT.

LET'S GET MR. LEWIS GOING FIRST. THIS CASE WAS READY FROM THE BOARD IN OCTOBER. PLANNING AND ZONING AND THERE WAS NO EVIDENCE THE GRAVEL AND THE SWELL WAS EVER LEGAL. MR. BERRY SUBMITTED SOME DOCUMENTS AND WE DO HAVE THOSE TWO WITH THE PERMIT THAT HE SUBMITTED, THE SURVEY. And the permit is for a non-confirming driveway. He's going to have to speak to the relevance of those documents. And we didn't find any evidence that anything was legal.

Okay. So the... The owner of responsibility regarding driveway is the gravel that we're talking about? Yes. And then the unauthorized construction expired permits is? It's the same thing. Okay, okay, okay. All right. You can speak to this now.

All right. So first off, apologies to the board. I had this in my calendar last month, but I guess maybe fat fingered the date, and I had it for the second Thursday. So I spoke to Mr. Lewis the following Monday, and that's why I'm here today. I purchased my property in 2016. That property included two parking spaces on the swell that were decorated with gravel and a surrounding brick border. The purchase was signed off on by the village. I mean, like any sort of house purchases. There's even permits. I submitted a lot of documents. I want to thank Mr. Rodriguez and Mr. Pearl. Mr. Pearl, you gave me the idea that you cited the ordinance that was passed that there were certain properties that they had an existing structure that it may be grandfathered in, quote unquote. Mr. Rodriguez, you invited me to come here and view the file of my property, which I actually went home the night OF THAT I MET WITH YOU ALL LAST, AND I FOUND ALL THESE DOCUMENTS. I THEN WENT AND DOWNLOADED AERIAL PHOTOGRAPHS OF MY HOUSE, DATING ALL THE WAY BACK. I GOT AERIAL PHOTOGRAPHS 2012, WHICH WAS FOUR YEARS BEFORE I PURCHASED THE PROPERTY. STILL HAD THESE TWO GRAVEL PARKING SPICES ON THE SWALE. 2023 it's a little bit tougher to see because we're getting getting into dated technology but still two gravel parking spot bases on the swale 1991 really clear to see two gravel parking spaces on this whale. 1985, really easy to see two gravel parking spaces on this whale. 1978, one big ass parking space on this gravel parking space on this whale. 1971, that same big, large parking space on the swale. And then all the way, this is the oldest record I could actually get a photograph of. This is 1968. So that's a good 50 plus years of me having these parking spaces on the swale. Again, there is no permit violation because I didn't purchase the property and put these parking spaces in. The property was purchased as you can see back in 1968 with these parking the property was built in 1950 property had these parking spaces on the swale in 19 visually Going back to 1968. It was well over 50 50 years I also I also included in my evidence a copy of the ordinance that mr. Pearl reference that talks about legal non-conforming driveways or parking areas. I never had a driveway. This has been 50 plus, I mean, as far as I know, it's 75 years of not having a driveway. This has always been the parking space. So I included a copy of that. also a part in the code where it says that if if I wanted to I could upgrade I could change the material of the legal not conforming driveway then I also have a an inspection that was signed off on by the village in 2016 which was six months before I bought the property I think if you turn it's a very lengthy document but there is There is a, sorry I'm trying to find it here, a part that specifically calls out gravel parking spaces on the swale. Sorry. I know it's in here. Well, so I mean, like, I've done all the research.

Yeah, Leopold.

Here we go. This page right here.

Leopold, can you, for reference, can you give me 536.2 and 521? 536.2 and 521? Yeah, yeah, I mean, what's the allowed materials? At any time since the purchase of the property, have you added stone, removed stone, changed the shape of the driveway, or anything else?

No. I park cars there. That's it. And I maintain the grass. There's sprinklers on the soil as well.

Do you have parking spaces on your property for two vehicles?

I do not.

In the backyard either? No.

No. There's a wall that goes around the perimeter of my property, a concrete wall.

So these two areas can't fit a car?

The two areas on the swale? Yeah. They most definitely can fit a car.

I was asking if there are two spaces on the property line, not on the swale. Yeah. Because that's the mandate. Yeah, that's the current. Is there room on your property?

Yeah, it's a very small I mean the swale is massive I Mean no, I mean there's enough room for two cars them unless they've extended the front of the house outside of the buildable area of their property There's enough room for two cars side by side in front of the house. Oh Between the sidewalk and the house, there's enough room for two cars side by side. And the other issue is, I mean, if you could pass out your photos so we can enter them into the record, because I don't know how you're determining that they're gravel from satellite imagery.

Well, I mean, I can't. Yeah, you're a suit. Right.

But if you want to enter your images into the record, those are your images?

Yeah, everybody has the same copy.

No, I only have the one.

Oh, sorry. I emailed Louisville, I think, the next day after we met last.

Apologies. I thought yours had all of that. So the expired permit here was for the walkway? So it wasn't closed? Because there's no...

I mean, I would hope it was closed because I was able to purchase the property.

Unfortunately.

Yeah, it was 521. It doesn't always go that way. Yeah, just 521. OK.

Expiration 10, 29, 2016. And sorry, when did you purchase the house?

In December of 2016.

So the logistics buyer just before you bought the house. Sure. But even if it expired, it expired prior to the change of ownership. So it was the previous owner who, if it wasn't closed, didn't close it, though a title search probably should have.

Yeah, but it's still attached to the new owner.

I know. I was just curious about that.

Well, then it would be for the driveway, the non-conforming driveway that doesn't have a permit. Existing? Yeah, through all of their search, there's no permit for the driveway. Sure.

I was just curious because there was permits in here.

I wanted to make sure that that was not what it was. And there is a permit that specifies two gravel parking spaces on this well. It says gravel right in the middle of them. which was signed off and stamped.

This is a survey of the property. This isn't a permit. The permit has nothing to do with the creation of the parking. That's just a survey of what exists on your property. Even if you had an outbuilding that was never permitted, it would still be on the survey and described.

I'm a little confused here. Okay, Barry. What are you confused about? Well, am I understanding that there's two separate issues that the unauthorized construction is or is not connected with the driveways?

No, I believe Mr. Lewis' testimony, and correct me if I'm wrong, is that it is attached to the driveway. This permit? There is no permit for a gravel. Nobody has ever pulled a permit for two gravel parking spaces on the street.

Okay, so we have one issue here. Correct.

The two are the same issue.

The two code section violations are a single issue. Mr. Arango, if you would, am I understanding this ordinance correctly? What is it? It's 2022-03. Am I correct in understanding that if you had a gravel driveway, you can keep it?

No.

Well, it says legal non-conforming driveway. It says it may be replaced. May be replaced. It doesn't say have to be replaced.

No, exactly.

Okay. And also, if you look, maybe, no, no, no, no. In the beginning, Village Code permits existing legal non-conforming driveways to remain and change ownership as long as the use remains unchanged and there are no substantial improvements greater than 50% of the area cost or changes of material.

Well, and this is why I asked if he's made any modifications to it. Right. And we know by his own photographic evidence that there has been changes to the driveway.

Okay, I missed that part.

In 1968? Well, it doesn't give a time frame. I'm not arguing either way. I'm just stating that it doesn't give a time frame in which it was to have changed. But we know that the driveway has changed in at least one time, at least in shape and material. However, when is this ordinance from?

22.

So that shouldn't have anything to do with it.

I mean, in the first place, if there's no permits.

Well, but that's why I'm arguing both sides, yes.

Well, you're assuming that the village's records are perfect.

I'm assuming a lot of things. Yeah. Right. What I'm assuming is now that we're trying to hold – Well, that's but we get into the gray area because he did change his front drive his front approach to the house has been changed I Did not change that. Yeah, but it It changed

No, but I'm saying even the sidewalk, right, because there was a recent change to the approach to the house, the walkway to the house, and some other, which would have required at that point, if it had gotten caught, a driveway on his property. Agreed.

That was the previous owner. It was not caught by the city. It was not caught by the code of compliance, and it didn't flag anything in the title search.

Yeah, I agree.

So the question is, are we holding current residents responsible?

Well, the general rule is the problem attaches to the property, not to the owner. If you buy a house that has a defect in it, it's up to the new owner to fix it.

And how are we determining grandfather? Because you can get away with unpermitted electrical that's grandfathered into your house all day long.

I don't know. This is a specifically legislated defiance, legal non-conforming. It was okay before, and then the rules changed, and it says specifically if you had the old driveway, it no longer conforms, but it is legal unless you modify it.

Provided it was legal to begin with.

And it was legal to begin with. I have a house that was built in 1942, and when I look at the blueprints and permits that I pulled, it doesn't show the driveway.

So, in theory, if it's non-conforming now, it is not covered under that ordinance, because it was not legal to begin with.

I don't see that.

But if it was...

You're just assuming it's not permitted.

Well, we can only have to go to the proof that we have is that it is not permitted.

But I mean, in 1950, who knows what kind of record?

This is exactly the conversation I'm trying to have.

Both fighting both sides of the yeah, but and then the question would be with the question would be to if we allowed this Driveway to stand through non-conformance permit. Well, no then does that survive the next sale of the house?

Yes Well, this is the concern it's not a Revolutionary idea

Well, no, I'm just saying an unpermitted structure, if we were to proceed with this, an unpermitted structure, if that were to survive the sale of the house again, then we're entering into... Well, you're convinced it's unpermitted.

I'm not convinced.

I'm not convinced that it is permitted. I'm not convinced it's unpermitted. I am definitely unconvinced that it is permitted.

At some point, somebody had to have come to the village. The way that I see it, someone had to have come to the village to get that put in. The question that I guess we're asking is... Was the paperwork ever done? So.

Well, we know that we don't have, I mean, we don't know for a thousand percent sure, but at some point the driveway changed.

Correct.

And we don't have the original permit from when the house was built. Correct. Showing the driveway. And we don't have the new driveway. So we have two missing driveway permits.

Can I make a point? I believe that the driveway was changed. because the space originally was really large. And there is a part, I want to say, I don't know if it's in here, I remember reading it, that talked about It couldn't – any space on the swale could not take up more than – I don't know if – It's 10 percent gravel.

That's what you're looking for. Yeah, the city's property is 10 percent.

It wasn't that. It was – I know I had something to do with – and that's most likely why in the change of 19 – Let me just make sure it's 521. I mean, we're talking 53, 57 years. I'm sorry. My math is bad. Can you see when –

The last night 520 or 521 was changed does it touch can you see that if you're a meeting code it should be able to show you So so part of my I think we're because that's why I like sitting here.

We always sink our heads so the way to the way Village Council to fix it is from what I've understood so far and it's been crystal clear that Your last name again?

Barry.

Mr. Barry would then need to file for a permit for the existing driveway, would he not? To then get it into compliance to say, hey, even though...

If he were to do that, based on this here, he would have to change the material. He could leave the space as it is, the shape and dimension, but he would have to change it to compliant material.

Real quick.

So even if the shape and the layout of the driveway is not to code anymore, he would have to change the material at least to compliant code, be it concrete, asphalt, whatever the compliant material is.

No, I'm saying whatever the compliant material is.

I'm not going to pontificate on compliant material. That was my question. Well, he would have to – He would have to research that because we can't recommend the material. Correct.

I'm wondering what the compliant material is as per the village code.

It would be in, I think it's in 536.2.

What I'm trying to get is to a solution because that's what the board does. We try to get to a solution. We can go all day.

Preferably without making precedence and without changing the law.

Yes, sir. Yes, Mr. Chairman. Absolutely. And we can pontificate all day as to who, why, didn't. I want to get to help him out so we can proceed because there's people waiting here. So I'm thinking that the best way to do it, if he's in agreement, is, hey, just get a new permit and meet the compliance for whatever the material is. And now you have fixed everything that wasn't fixed for 50-some years.

Well, and you wouldn't be required to put additional parking on your own property and things. None of those other compliance would occur. Because if it were to go a different way, then you would have to make a huge change.

And that's food for thought. I'm not telling you what to do.

I'm suggesting that. I can appreciate that piece of feedback. The problem is that the flooding in the area is really bad. And the benefits of the driveway that I have now is that water can go into the earth. If I put concrete in there, that ain't going to happen. As it stands right now, I've got to build a bridge to get from my... end of my property across the sidewalk because it's a river it's six inches deep anytime it rains significantly here so whether it's at the beginning of the day when i'm going to work or it's at the end of the day when i'm coming home that's the thing you got to do you got a long jump over the thing or just take off your shoes and walk through the damn thing So, like, I don't really want to put in concrete because I'm at a – it's – I don't want water getting any closer to my house than it already is. You know what I'm saying? That's a Pandora's box of all new.

Yeah, but we're reticent because we don't want to rule one way and then that forces you to put a driveway all the way onto the other side of your – past the sidewalk. Yeah. Right, which is the new code requires you to have at least two cars fitting on your property.

But if it's been this way for 50 some odd years.

I understand. Then I don't, I mean, like. I understand. I mean. I don't know the rest of the board, but it might actually be easier to get a variance than to, you know what I mean?

I actually talked to the mayor about it because we had a meeting because people are speeding down our street all the time, and he told me he'd sign off on that in the heartbeat.

Yeah, it's not his choice, though. I know it's not. He said it came across his desk. It's not building. But the variance is the way. Well, I mean, I'd be willing to table this for an amount of time for him to go in front of PNC because the PNC requires posting and all these other things. The driveway is not causing an immediate concern. I mean, we could give him 90 days, six months or something. I'm just throwing it out there. And then we could come back and deal with it at a later date. I know you don't want to come to this meeting again. I know you definitely don't want to go to the PNC stuff because it's going to be quite a bit of work. But I am personally reticent to resolve this case, and then we have a bunch more loopholes that we've created, and we shouldn't be legislating from this bench.

Let's get an opinion from our – he's been sitting there itching to say something.

Mr. Arango, we need you on the record, please.

You've got to get the microphone. You're not on a mic.

Everybody gives them a mic.

Jose Arango, on behalf of the village, the board's on the right track. If you're going to remove the legal nonconformity conundrum from the equation, then you're either going to have to legalize it, whether it's the traditional administrative procedures of legalizing it, getting a permit, and then that's going to basically set the mark from here on out. It's going to be legalized, assuming it can be legalized. If not, you're going to look at some other remedy. I'm not giving you counsel. This is just from the village's perspective. um for some you know variance waiver warrant whatever it's called within the village and legalizing it that way

Well, there's essentially four paths right now. Yes. You get a variance. You get the code changed. We deny it and make it illegal, or we approve it and ostensibly possibly make a bunch of other stuff. Sorry.

I wasn't even considering a code change. That's another level.

Can I give the fifth option that we haven't even discussed yet? Yes. Get rid of the gravel and park on your grass. No, I'm saying get rid of the gravel. I'm going to get notices that the grass ain't up there. In the swale. Get rid of the gravel and swale and just plant grass there. And then you're allowed to park on the soil.

Yeah, but then they're going to come back because of the dead grass from parking on it. I already have two neighbors that have been issued citations. We've had a bunch come before us.

That might open up the door to another violation. That's not going to get him. I know, but he's going to be back on a different subject. Correct.

I mean, I only see the four outcomes.

So the legal nonconformity, you're going to have to prove that it was legal from the beginning. The board had the assessment. They were right in their understanding. So it was legal from the beginning, which You're going to be doing some archaeology on it.

Well, counsel, I only have the tools available to me. I mean, I deep-dived into every little folder that had to do with my property. If it existed, I read it. I'd scanned it. Most of the stuff didn't have much to do with what I'm talking about now. Then I went and I downloaded a special software. I got aerial photos. I found a website that takes aerial photographs.

You've done a great job.

I provided all the evidence. This is over 50 years of the same thing. Like, you can't tell me that all of a sudden it's a – like, this seems like such a small, insignificant, and ridiculous thing. Excuse me. But, like, it's so insignificant and not – like – It's not like anybody's going to – nobody's going to die. Nobody's property is going to sink into the ocean. It's not going to cause any – there's probably some grumpy person that maybe took issue with it or the fact that a gentleman on my street bought a house and put in a gravel parking space that was really ugly looking, and he had these big old gravel things. Maybe that caused the problem, and I'm just a victim of circumstance here. I have another neighbor who also became a victim of the same circumstance, who has a historic home. I mean, I have a 75-year-old home. So as far as I can date, I couldn't – I went back as far as 1968 because the software or the images that I had from before then, I think it went all the way back to 61. Yeah. This software that I download couldn't interpret that sort of file. So, I mean, I've done everything to show that I'm in the right. I didn't do anything wrong. I didn't make any alterations to the property. I didn't need to pull any permits. I didn't violate any permits.

It's not you. It's the property. It's the property.

It's definitely not you. But my thing is that it hasn't been a problem for half a century, over half of a century. You weren't probably even alive. when the house was originally built. So it's fair to say – Or when this driveway – in 1968. Were you born before 1968? Not before.

No.

There you go. So that parking space existed on the day you were born, and it still exists.

Well, but that one didn't. That's the problem too. That's the problem too. We know for sure that that one didn't. It did. No, we have a different – we have aerial photos that show a different shape of the parking lot.

Yes, because it was required that they fill in. They lost space of the parking space. I understand. That was a requirement.

If that was a requirement, we would have expected to see a permit or even a code violation then that they rectified a code violation. Did we see any of that?

This is why... Trust me, I understand.

I definitely don't want to penalize you for a gravel driveway you didn't put in. If we rule one way, it could open up the floodgates to many, many other problems. No problems, not insignificant problems. I know it's...

And who really did you a disservice was the title company. Because the title company should have caught this and said, hey, we have a problem here. We can't identify it.

The title company is not going to find a driveway.

Well, the paperwork to show that there was an issue with this driveway. Someone somehow should have found this and pointed this out to you. Because now you're holding left to back. And what I'm trying to do, from my point of view, where I sit is, hey... It's a legal thing. You just got to make it legal. And so what I'm trying to have you do is come to an agreement with the board that doesn't open a Pandora's box. It gets the property or the piece that's in question legalized so you can move on.

But what's to say when I apply for the permit, they say, oh, that's not allowed.

That's why you have to – I think your best option and the option that's going to be the way that this works is that you go to P&Z and P&Z gives you a variance. Then it's permanent on the property. I mean – And you can reference – It's basically – a variance is essentially just backdating the permit.

You've done all the work already. You've come to the board and you've done it. It's just filing it. It's just the pain that you've got to do it, but you've done all the work.

I don't mind having to push a little paper. Well, it's just you're going to have to post on the property. This is such an insignificant thing. Yeah.

But you'll legalize it.

We say, hey, you know, Mr. Berry, you're okay. Sorry, you ain't ever going to see me again, and you probably ain't ever going to see somebody come in here and say, I got a problem with my driveway. Yeah.

Yeah, it's, yeah. The problem is our hands are tied.

Hands are tied, yeah. Because it's a P&C issue ultimately. We can only adjudicate on the legalities of what's going on here. We can't make the determination whether or not it makes sense.

But if the violation wasn't just to begin with.

But it's not our place.

The problem is on a plain text reading, you are in violation, right? So there's really, we haven't been proved that there was a permit. There's no proof that there was a permit. And in a plain text thing, what we're trying not to do is vote that there was a violation. I don't want to vote that there was a violation because then it's going to be a ton of trouble for you. The best thing to do, I think, is to go to PNC, see if you can get a variance. If not, see if there's a conforming... driveway that will work for you maybe very small concrete ribbons like something something that'll they'll allow that'll work for you that won't be terribly expensive but everybody at the end of the day goes home and we're all good you know uh the problem is is on a plain text reading of of the code and and the issue is that you are in violation and i'm i'm i don't want to vote that you're in violation because then it kicks off a whole nother different problem, right? So what I'd like to do is I think 90 or six months? 90 days? For PNZ? With the holiday? No. Like he said, it's not children aren't being murdered by the gravel.

Six months is fine. Yeah, I think... Get through the holidays and get time to do all of that because there's going to be a backlog after the holidays.

Then he can take his time to do it too, right? And And honestly, if you need more time than that, just talk to him. He doesn't even need to come back. Talk to Mike or talk to Mr. Lewis.

But that's when I may come back to these guys.

Yeah, and then we'll take care of it. He has all the files, too, and they're all dated.

Where else to look?

I can't find a permit if it ain't here. I'll never find it.

PNZ can be a pain to get a variance, but I can't imagine that they're not going to do that.

I just think if you look at my property file, it was a single owner for the longest of times. This guy pulled a permit to... wipe his ass. He pulled a permit for everything.

Up until recently, anything over $100 needed a permit.

Right, but I'm saying it's not like the guy was doing anything that he wasn't supposed to do.

No, and definitely I'm sorry that, like we say in the beginning, our entire thing here is not for punitive. We're not here, we're just trying to... I understand.

I appreciate the assistance.

Yeah, yeah. Lots of us go ankle deep every time it rains.

Right. That's why I'm trying to avoid the concrete.

It's like, what I have right now, it works.

And, like, it really ain't a problem. Might I suggest rain gardens for your front yard? That will help with the flooding dramatically.

That rain garden. Rain gardens. Look into that next time.

All right, so do we have a motion? I did move. You did move? Do I have a second? Second. All right. Madam Clerk, would you call roll?

Board Member Kangiano? Yes. Board Member Berryman? Yes. Board Member Rodriguez? Yes. Board Member Pearl? Yes. Board Member Hahn? Yes. Chair Huber?

Yes. All right. So like I said, just keep the code enforcement in the loop so that they know that, you know, if you need more time at PNZ, you know, that we can afford you as much time as we can.

So just because I'm a little ignorant as to like the process, so like I need to apply for to meet with Planning and Zoning for them to give me a variance? Yeah, I mean, there's a whole... Am I asking for a permit?

I mean, I think my recommendation is to ask for a variance. And if you come to the Village, I'm sure there's a whole entire process for that, and they'll be more than happy to give you all the rundown. I would tell you, but then if I'm wrong... Whatever.

That's fine. All I have to do is go to the Village Council website.

Yeah, just come here. It's literally, if you come by in the morning, there's hardly anybody here at first thing in the morning, and you can probably be out of here in five minutes with all the information you need.

Okay.

Hopefully this can get taken care of. Thank you for hearing out. Sorry, everybody. That was a real long, complicated one.

We've got a deadly driveway on the – You're placing a trail for everyone. Don't worry. You'll get a statue at the end. Thanks again, guys. No, thank you.

All right. Madam Clerk, do we have anyone else present for enforcement? No, sir. Okay. Okay. Also on tonight's agenda is a matter of staff's request for orders imposing previously adjudicated fines as a penalty for lack of timely compliance with the board's prior orders. I will now call the penalty cases on the agenda. We have case 0724373, case 0725193, and case 0825249. Mr. Director, the files on all these penalty cases contain an appropriate affidavit demonstrating in each such case the violations referenced in your request continue to exist subsequent to the date on which they were to have been corrected in accordance with the previous orders of this board and that to date no one has contacted Neighborhood Services to advise that these violations have been corrected.

They do, Mr. Chair, and they have not.

All right. I will now entertain a motion to impose fines.

I move that in each case currently remaining on the penalty docket for tonight's hearing, each respective violator be ordered to pay the daily fine previously adjudicated and authorized to be imposed against them by prior order of the board. Retroactive from the day the violation was to have been corrected. That upon recording the board's order in this regard will constitute a lien on the property of the violator.

Do I have a second? Second. All right. Madam Clerk, would you call roll?

Yes.

Yes. yes all right thank you very much uh ma'am clerk do we have anyone present for request for relief okay if you would state your name and address for the record

GOOD EVENING, MR. CHAIR, MEMBERS OF THE BOARD, MICKEY MARRERO, LAWFRIEND BURKE, HOWARD ELFORD, AND LARGIN 200 SOUTH BISCAYNE BOULEVARD. HERE ON BEHALF OF BARBARA BELTRAN AND HER HUSBAND, ALFRED, WHO IS WITH ME TODAY, ALONG WITH MY COLLEAGUE, PETER SHOEMAKER, AND ALSO THEIR CO-OWNER, ZOILA GUILLARDO, WHO IS NOT HERE.

ALL RIGHT. SO WE ARE HERE. WE HAVE Let's see, where am I? Oh, 1210 Northeast 97th Street. We have case 1023-357, fine amount $18,000. Case 1224-2022, fine amount $59,100. Case 1094-2022, fine amount $111,250 for a grand total of $188,350. The amount proposed is $18,835. Please explain why we should accept your offer.

Thank you, Mr. Chair. And again, I recognize that this case was before you all last month. It was a unique case. I spoke with Ms. Beltran. We saw what occurred. And I just wanted to give it a fresh look here and seek your relief. It's a very bizarre case. Ms. Beltran, and just going back, I understand that the prior owner, who still remains on title, did some things that she shouldn't have done. It was a unique situation. Ms. Gallardo bought a property, maybe got a little bit in over her head during that time shortly after. She was dealing with a sick parent. Both her mother and father passed away within a few months. She had to travel back and forth from Cuba to visit her family. Traveling back and forth from Cuba right now, obviously, not the easiest thing. Dealing with two dying parents, not the easiest thing. She actually sought therapy because of all that happened. She got into financial straits. She was weeks away from losing the property foreclosure. Ms. Beltran came in basically with a white hat trying to help her. She was referred. They have no relationship. They don't know each other. A mutual acquaintance put her together with them to see if there was a way to salvage it. She was able to find a way to save her from foreclosure. She was able to briefly stay in the home. And then she basically, Ms. Beltran, who's with me today, took over the situation. I recognized that there were some neighbors that were impacted by some of the illegal work that was done by, you know, I understand she had some relatives staying with her that may have made some noise at some point. I'm not excusing any of that. I understand that some things occurred that shouldn't have occurred. We're here today to move forward. Ms. Beltran came in, and I recognize the last month she made an offer that was well below what probably should have been offered. In her mind, she didn't, until she was at this hearing, didn't recognize all the stuff that had caused concerns to the neighbors. She saw someone that needed help. She came in, thought she was solving the situation, not just for Ms. Gallardo, but for the neighborhood. It was a problem property. I recognize she bought a property with violations. She tried to resolve them. In addition, all the other things that happened, it's really just like a black cloud was over this woman's head. She hired someone. She actually took him to small claims court. She was not able to recover anything, but they took her money. Nothing happened. Thankfully, Ms. Beltran and her husband do have experience in real estate, and they were able to quickly take over the situation. they tried to legalize things they were going to get permits and they looked at it and she recognized this is not a solvable situation she went ahead and got demolition permit herself got the property demoed and now as I think you know was spoken last month they have a buyer that's got plans for a beautiful home I think it's going to be a great addition to the neighborhood IT'S GOING TO IMPROVE NOT JUST WHAT WAS THERE ON THAT PROPERTY BUT HOPEFULLY PROPERTY VALUES AROUND IT. THAT DEAL IS PENDING THIS CASE. WE LOOKED AT THE HISTORY OF MITIGATION TO SEE KIND OF WHERE TO FALL HERE AND BECAUSE OF THE IMPACT WITH THE NEIGHBORS BEFORE AND SOME OF THE TESTIMONY, WE WENT ON THE HIGHER END. WE LOOKED AT THE LAST YEAR AND MITIGATIONS, YOU KNOW, FOR THESE CASES SOMETIMES RAINED BETWEEN LIKE 3 TO 10%, REALLY 10% BEING ON THE MORE HIGH END. WE CAME IN WITH THAT 18,000. is a significant amount of money. I understand the fine is $188. A lot of money has been spent by Ms. Beltran and her family to try and bring this to light. She didn't realize what she was getting herself into, frankly. And I've spoken to her several times. But here we are. She thought she was doing something good. She took on more than she realized. We just want to get past today so that she can get this to the new owner, build a beautiful home here, and move on. We recognize that the situation before you wasn't perfect, but it's now in a good place. There's nobody there bothering neighbors. It's going to be a beautiful home, and we just want to get, you know, hopefully with your consideration, this mitigation and move this forward.

All right. Does anyone have any questions, comments?

Nothing? What happened last month?

Have you got questions and comments? I can dive right in.

This is the home of East of 12 on the south side of 97, right? Yes. It was just demolished? Yes. Okay.

With no water.

Oh. I did see that. Keep going. I have a question.

I made my presentation. I didn't realize you weren't here. I apologize.

I'm just trying to see what was the, it doesn't state what the issues were on the property.

So, and again, she doesn't know, and I know less. I watched the video. Allegations, a couple of neighbors were here. One in particular was very upset. He said that there was loud noises coming from the property. There was work done without permits. Miss, again, my client is not the woman that was there. They have a business relationship, but they have no other relationship. When speaking to her, she said she had a couple of cousins staying there. And it appears that, again, she was by herself. She lost her parents. She was a mess. So I'm not saying that excuses not the best behavior, but there are a lot of mitigating circumstances. But all that's over now. There was allegations that people were drinking and there was noise. THE HOUSE IS GONE AND WE JUST WANT TO GET THIS PROPERTY SOLVED AND MOVE ON. SO WE'RE ASKING FOR YOUR CONSIDERATION AND HOPEFULLY GET THIS PAST US. DO YOU HAVE A CLOSING DATE YET? THE NEW ONE SET?

We're looking at December 16.

Okay. Has the sale price changed?

It has not changed, no.

Okay, what was the sales price again?

We're under contract for $1,550,000. This is the buyer under contract.

Did you get sworn in?

No.

Just swear him in real quick.

All right, perfect.

Just...

Hi, sorry, I wasn't here last time. My name is Tyler Davidson. I am the buyer. I actually own another property in Miami Shores that we're developing on Hunter Street right now. And I just wanted to add also that not only has everything they said been very true and Barbara's been doing a great job trying to clear all this out, but also I'm personally invested in this now because I have paid out of pocket to help them with demo and everything to get us to closing. So we have been pending closing for months contingent on this being resolved. You know, I personally have over $30,000 out of pocket pending on this closing now for the property. So everyone is trying their best just to kind of get everything done, cleared, approved, and back in compliance so we can step in and build a house and put a beautiful house on the street. So nice to meet you all.

Do you have plans already?

I do not have plans. I'm an architect on retainer because I'm waiting to close to start.

All right. Memory service is going to be 5,000 square foot house on this property? Yes. Something like that. Yeah. Which will sell for roughly?

3.5.

Okay. So now do you have any questions? I'm familiar with the situation. I've heard about it from a neighbor. Good. Well, All right. No other questions or comments from the board? No other questions. All right. Hearing none, so we have a fine amount of $188,350. The amount proposed is $18,835. Is that your best and final offer, knowing that that's the only number we're going to vote on?

Yes.

Okay. And how long would you need to pay? Close the door, man.

As soon as possible. 30 days? Yeah.

All right. We have an offer of $18,835 payable in 30 days. Do I have a motion? I move. Do I have a second?

Second.

All right. Any other questions, comments from the board? No. Madam Clerk, would you call roll?

Board Member Rodriguez?

Just to help you out, yes.

Board Member Berryman?

No.

Board Member Cangiano?

Yes.

Board Member Pearl? No. Board Member Hahn?

Yes.

Chair Huber?

Well, my vote doesn't count, but I'll give it a yes anyway.

Thank you. Thank you very much. Have a wonderful holiday. Thank you.

Why doesn't your vote count?

Because it had already passed.

It already passed.

Because of math.

Because of math, yeah.

The Crow Mistress. She never lies. Madam Clerk, who do we have next for request?

We have Chamama Fabian, 9055 Northeast 2nd Avenue.

All right. So we have Chamama Fabian. Please approach the podium and state your name and address for the record.

My name is Chamama Fabian.

And your address?

I don't speak very well. It's French. Sorry.

Sorry. My French is even poorer than your English.

My address is 9055 Northeast Second Avenue.

OK. And you reside at that address? You live there?

No, I live to Paris.

Yeah, it's a vacation home or rental property?

Two, three months here.

Okay.

Okay. My boy is a hospital in Miami Shore. Miami... At the...

Okay, I suggest everybody read it because, yeah, it'll be a little easier.

And they're using the home mostly to be with their son.

Yep. Okay, so we have case 526-2021. The current fine amount is $134,250. The amount proposed is $100. So... If you can, explain why we should accept your offer. If not, I believe we have on record your arguments.

I was sick. It's not possible to go here for COVID. It's a free year. I have a problem. I go to CTL for C2, okay. I'm sorry. I'm not saying go to... I'm sorry.

Can we reference anything to staff?

So we have the violations are from 2021, clean and paint exterior and clean driveway and walkway. Mike, whose case is this?

It's my case, Mr. Chair.

Okay. It was your case? It was your case because it's now. Okay. So, well, I mean, we don't need, but how?

There is a strong component of the language barrier.

Okay, yeah.

And, yeah, so they're unfortunately not at home for a good portion of the year. We've had many conversations and, you know, obviously been very lenient. But, you know, we do get complaints here and there.

Okay. And what was the original complaint?

Oh, the condition? Mostly for the overgrown – the property would be overgrown. Okay. Because they're not home. So then we did have a conversation, and of course, you know, we don't refer or recommend anyone. I did give them an avenue, and they did contact an individual that would come periodically when they were in France. But – Again, the language barrier I want to say.

But this case, the 526-2021, this case with the unsightly exterior and the sidewalk, what was the specific condition? Was it that the paint was peeling or if it was moldy?

I would just say dirty they are on 2nd Avenue. So, you know, it was weathered. Yeah.

Okay.

No word, yes.

Is it in good shape now?

And they even installed a new roof.

Yeah, I think we have pictures of a new steel roof on here.

I can tell you. I'll just go out on a limb here, but staff recommends the offer. Okay.

Do we have any questions or comments from the board? I don't know if anybody here speaks French.

I'm not understanding the amount that's written in down there.

Oh, that's the European one. Yeah, that's the European one.

Oh, okay.

That first thing is a one. If it looks like a flag, it's a one.

Okay, thank you.

Any other questions, comments from the board? Mr. Hahn, you have something?

I was going to pull a berry.

Okay, yeah, I mean. Go ahead. Well, we can do, why don't we do the final question, and then we can do a BP.

Yep.

Okay, so we have a fine amount of $134,250. The amount proposed is $100. Is that your best and final offer?

This is the language.

Yeah. So what is your highest offer, most money?

Translate?

Why don't we help him out here?

NO, I KNOW. THAT'S THE THING. BECAUSE IF YOU USE A TRANSLATE APP, THEN THEY COULD MISTRANSLATE. SO WE HAVE A WRITTEN OFFER OF $100. LET'S SAY PAYABLE IN 60 DAYS. DO I HAVE A MOTION?

MR.

CHAIR.

NO, WE'RE GOING TO BARRY.

I MOVE THE DEPARTMENT RECEIPT OF $1,500.

Within 90 days.

Okay.

Let the lien on this house be released. I second that.

You second that? All right. Do we have any further discussion? Can you repeat it again, sir?

1,590 days. 1,590 days.

Do we have any other further discussion?

No.

Can we ask him the question in translation or no? Do you speak French? No, with a phone or someone else here or no?

That would be a question for counsel. The answer is no. Lupo, do you speak French? Okay, so what I'm going to ask you to do is to not translate any testimony or anything, but tell him the current situation, that the offer of $100, his original offer didn't pass. And what we're proposing is $1,500 payable in 90 days. That if it passes, and this is the normal thing that we give everybody, so you're not giving him testimony. We're just telling him at this point, because his motion didn't pass, that if he chose to accept the $1,500 payable in 90 days, then everything goes away. If he doesn't, he can come back to another meeting. That's it, right? Because that's no testimony.

We're not... Yeah, but also tell him that if he decides to not accept it, he can come back to another meeting. With a different number.

He doesn't have to make the decision now. They say they accept.

Oh, well.

Well, he has 90 days to accept or not accept, so we can feel it. Well, we have to vote on it, but we always say this beforehand to let people know what's going on. Okay. So we have a motion and a second. We have no further discussion. Madam Clerk, would you call roll? Hold on. We're going to call roll on it first. You can't pay now. That's what I wanted to understand.

Board Member Hahn?

Yes.

Board Member Pearl? Yes. Board Member Rodriguez? Yes. Board Member Berryman? Yes. Board Member Gandiano? Yes. Chair Huber? Yes. All right.

So he has 90 days to, huh? Your vote doesn't count.

It doesn't count. You're voting. Okay. Okay. C'est fini.

Thank you very much. Merci. Thank you. Thank you.

Sorry for... No, no, no. No problem.

Madam Clerk, do we have anyone else present for a request for relief?

We have Oscar Rizzo.

Okay. Luckily, his name isn't Frank. All right, Mr. Rizzo, if you would state your name and address for the record.

Oscar Rizzo, 107 Northeast 93rd Street.

All right, and we are here for case 1317-2022, fine amount $172,050. The amount proposed is $12,000. Please explain why we should accept your offer.

I came here – I tried to do this once before in September, October, with not realizing that I had an open permit – well, an issue with my house at the time. I had an open violation. You didn't want to vote at that time. until I resolved all my open permits. That issue is now closed. I've closed that permit out. My issue was with failure to maintain grass, the paint of the house, the maintenance, missing grass on the property. There was a broken electrical cover on the wall that was just from old use. Failure to maintain the clean sidewalk. Nothing that was detrimental that I would consider extravagant in terms of there was no – I didn't think there was anybody complaining about that at the time. When I first tried to remedy this, I think was started in 2022. I then began doing some remodeling of the house. I started the hurricane window replacement on the entire house. I didn't feel at the time that I should be doing that painting the house doing other stuff while I'm still doing this entire remodeling of the house after like hurricane permit problems it took about two years to go through because of issues by that time I had forgotten about the issue not anybody's fault my own I understand that when I finally started to do that I then rectified the issues in February and then I applied for remediation and I think a reasonable fine is it's taken me three years to resolve this from the original case $4,000 a year is what I'm proposing, and that's what I'm asking for.

All right. Is the property for sale? Yes, the property is for sale. What's the amount it's offered at?

$1 million.

Okay. Do you have a contract already or no?

No, I did, but it fell through.

Okay. All right. Do we have any other questions or comments from the board? All right. Hearing none. We have a fine amount of $172,050. The amount proposed is $12,000. Is that your best and final offer? Yes. And how long would you need to pay?

30 days.

60 days? 30 days. 30 days? Okay. The amount offered is $12,000 payable in 30 days. Do I have a motion? So moved.

Second.

All right. Madam Clerk, would you call roll?

Board Member Berryman?

Yes.

Board Member Congenial?

Yes.

Board Member Rodriguez? Yes. Board Member Pearl? Yes. Board Member Hahn? Yes. Chair Huber?

Yes. All right. Thank you very much. Thank you. Next on the agenda, we have three months worth of meeting minutes. Did everyone have a chance to review those meeting minutes in the email? All right. Do I have a motion to accept the minutes? I so move. Do I have a second? All in favor say aye. Aye.

All those opposed say nay.

Ayes have it. All right. Do we have any other discussion?

Did we ever bring up the 103rd? House by the school?

No, we've talked about it, but there's nothing we can do. Hasn't it been six months? No.

Not yet? I think in January, February, six months, right? No moving out of them.

No moving, but there's nothing we can do.

Well, I mean, that was a... We did like a special thing.

That was like six months to get the house back in order, but the tiles are still there. Nothing's been done, nothing to the house.

Do you know anything about that? The house across the street from 103rd? That we gave the extension to the Canadians.

The Canadians sold it.

Across from the school. Across from the school with the tile on the roof. Oh, that.

That's the RA.

The reasonable accommodation that we did.

Yeah, they're working on it. Sure looks like it. That clock is ticking.

That's a loud clock that's ticking, too, because that is a large number.

It's like 1.3. All right.

Do we have any other discussion after that? All right. Do I have a motion to adjourn?

Second.

All right. All in favor say aye. Aye. All in favor say nay. Ayes have it.

We are now adjourned.