Code Enforcement Hearing - public_hearing

Okay, can you hear me now?

Yeah, okay.

All right. It is 9.01 AM. I'll call to order the code enforcement hearings for the city of Norfolk. If everyone could please stand and join me in the Pledge of Allegiance. I pledge allegiance to the flag of the United States of America, and to the republic for which it stands, one nation, under God, indivisible, with liberty and justice for all. They moved the flags on us.

There's actually

There's a particular way that's supposed to be, and it's not that way. They need to move them back. Okay, we have no public comment cards filled out. Are there any corrections to the minutes of the July 23rd, 2026 code enforcement hearings? Hearing no corrections, those minutes are approved. All right, so in just a moment here, what we're going to do is we'll start calling the cases for those of you who are here. We take your cases 1st. We don't do them in the order of of the agenda. We take them in the order that you signed up. So, if you were the 1st, 1 here, your case will go 1st. The city staff will stand at this podium over here. I'll ask you to come to this podium over on this side of the room. City staff presents their case 1st, they put on a prima facie case. That that there was a violation of the code at the end of their presentation. You are permitted. It's a quasi judicial hearing. So you can cross them and you can ask questions. You don't have to, or you can just present testimony by yourself or through other witnesses. as to why you believe you are not in violation of the code or everything except tree cases, tree clearing cases. It's a two step process where the first the first hearing determines whether or not there is a violation. and then a period of time is set before the fines would commence. Sometimes people are like, I realize I'm in violation and we talk a little bit and the city staff also gives input as to what's a reasonable period of time to bring the property into compliance. Couple other things is, they always say that people's greatest fear is public speaking. Don't worry about it. Just take some deep breaths. You'll get through this. I don't bite. And also, though, I do want to point out that this is your time to present your case. I am a neutral party here. I don't know anything about your cases. Until today. All right. And so, because of that, sometimes I'll hear like, well, I had this email from the city and somehow they assume that I have that email. I don't have anything. So, if there's anything that you want to put into the record. That you don't have with you right now, I would recommend you go talk to the person you checked in with. We will these usually these hearings go. Uh, no, we don't get done quicker than 10 o'clock. So if you need to run home, grab something that you didn't bring that you should, you realize you should have brought, we can accommodate that as long as you're back here before 10. And then the only other thing I'm going to say is that at this point in time, anyone who's going to speak, and this includes licensed attorneys, the processes in the city require that you take an oath. So at this point in time, anyone who's going to speak today, the clerk will ask you to stand and the clerk will administer the oath.

Can everyone wishing to provide testimony please stand and raise your right hand? Do you swear or affirm that the testimony you are about to provide is true and accurate to the best of your knowledge? So hope you got it.

All right. And then the last little bit of procedure is, again, so When you present your case, then city staff also has a right to cross-examine, and then usually I go back to the city, and then I give the property owner the final say, and then we close the hearing. So the first, we're actually going to call two cases because they both involve the same piece of property. So I'm going to call CECase 2602231. The property owner is Wendy Daschini, I hope I pronounced that correct. And the property address is 1572 Colton Bourne Road. And then the companion case to that is CE case 2602332. Again, the property owner is Wendy Daschini and the property address is 1572 Colton Bourne Road. Hold on just a second. Okay, that'll be at the end. Yeah, so I understand there's gonna be a public speaker card. If you'll see on the agenda, there's two places, so we'll take that public comment card at the end of the agenda when we come up with that again. All right, whenever the city is ready, they may begin.

My name is William Kitty. I'm a code enforcement field supervisor for the City of Northport, and I'm appearing on behalf of the City of Northport in case CE-26-02231 and CE-26-02332. My testimony today is limited to the facts that are relevant to whether the property complies with the City of Northport code. Section 2-508D of the code provides that irrelevant evidence should be excluded and should not be the basis for finding a fact. I will only testify to the facts that supports the city's burden to show that a violation existed and that the property owner is responsible for maintaining or allowing the violation to continue. This case involves the property located at 1572 Colton Bourne Road, Northport, Florida, 34288, which is located within the municipality of the city of Northport. The respondent is Wendy L. Deshaney, who also has an authorized speaker on her behalf, David Keelan, which is not an attorney, but just a person that is speaking for her. who is the owner of the record, which is Wendy, is according to the public records of Sarasota County, Florida. As the owner of the property, the respondent is legally responsible for what happens to their property. The property is alleged to be in violation of several sections, and they're all listed here, but I want to just go through them specifically. And this is going to be for both cases. So we have the IPMC code, section 304.1 for exterior structure, And that one is, bear with me just a second, I got my cards swept around. This is for the unsafe condition eight for roofing. And it's regarding the exterior of the structure, cell maintaining, good repair. structurally sound and sanitary as to not pose a threat to the public health, safety and welfare. The unsafe conditions, the following conditions shall be determined as unsafe and shall be required or replaced to comply with the international building components that have been, have defects that emit rain, roofing services, and adequate drainage, and any portion of the roofing framing that is not in good repair with signs of deterioration, fatigue, without proper anchorage, or incapable of supporting all nominal loads and resisting all load effects. My comments were the notes also are reflective of other agencies that were involved, such as the fire department, the building officials, the different agencies that responded. Post-fire inspection of the structure confirmed that the roof and the roofing components are compromised, including roofing materials exhibiting severe fire damage, resulting in defects that emit rain, compromised roofing framing displaying deterioration and structural failure due to the fire exposure. Portions of the roofing system is incapable of supporting nominal loads. or resisting required load effects. Structural instability resulting in the property being posted as unsafe. FPL responded to the scene and secured electrical services and the structure was officially placard by the building department. The homeowner, Wendy, was informed that permits are required to restore the structure to a safe and compliant condition and a full structural evaluation repairs must comply with the international building code as applicable. That was at the time of the initial, that's a day of the fire, I should say. That wasn't with me there, that was with the fire officials and with the building official. Can I interrupt this a second? Sure.

Do you have a date for the fire?

That was the day after Father's Day. June 21st. It was June 21st. June 21st. June 21st.

Okay. Of this year? Of this year. Okay. Okay. I'm sorry. Go ahead.

No problem. Next, we have another IPMC 2021 302.1 Sanitation. for exterior property and premises, so maintain a clean, safe, and sanitary condition. The occupants shall, that part of the exterior property that such occupants occupies or controls in clean and sanitary condition. Then the comments that I have on here are for just inspections, reveal significant accumulation of debris, deteriorated materials, animal waste, unsanitary conditions. and other refuse throughout the exterior of the property. The conditions create a potential health and safety hazard and fall below the minimum sanitation standards required by this section. The occupant is responsible for maintaining the exterior of their control and clean and sanitary manner. Current conditions indicate this responsibility has not been met at that time of the inspection and that the exterior premises remain in violation until cleaned and restored to compliance. Next one on there. is IPMC 2021 again 302.5 for rodent harborage structures and exterior property shall be kept free from rodent harborage and infestation. where rodents are found, they shall be promptly exterminated by approved processes that will not be injurious to human health. After pest elimination, proper precautions shall be taken to eliminate rodent harborage and prevent infestation or harborage as required. The presence of the debris in open secure animal feed deteriorating materials and likely has been reported, the code requires prompt extermination through approved methods. It's almost repeating itself. That do not endanger a human human's health, following by corrective measures to eliminate those harbinger points and prevent re-infestation. Current site conditions demonstrated that these requirements have been met and that the property remains in violation until proper pest control measures and sanitation practices are implemented. Now with this one in particular, I'm just looking.

Again, I apologize for, but what am I looking at right now on the screen?

This is showing that the receipt that they had gotten pest elimination, done, so they perform it. So that's what I was going to say here is I'm looking for it to be found in violation, but they do now have this one in compliance. Next one, it's under the same circumstances, but this is for the structure itself. Pest elimination structure violation IPMC 2021 309.1 infestation structures that shall be kept free from insects and rodents infestation structures in which the insects and rodents are found shall be promptly exterminated or approved. I'm not gonna liberate on this. This is the same exact thing. It's just a different more of interior structure versus exterior. I will just read on that the, The single-family dwelling, the occupant is additionally responsible for maintaining pest-free conditions within the area under their control. Current site conditions demonstrate that the responsibilities as both owner and occupants have been met. The property remains in violation until proper extermination, sanitation, and preventive measures are incomplete to restore compliance. I'm putting this in declines as well due to them doing what was asked of them. I just want to make sure that it's read in as a violation for that specifically during that inspection. That's for the first case. For the second one. 42-23 Northport City Code for accumulation of debris. and that is also regarding some of the same similar things you heard on the unsafe and unsanitary conditions. It shall be unlawful for any lot to accumulate a permanent accumulation of including but not limited to unusable household items, trash, lumber, any other building materials or equipment in which immediate use cannot be established. Tires, parts of vehicles, any other forms of items which create a fire and or health hazard and creates an unnatural breeding place for snakes, rats, mosquitoes, and other vermin, This violation, I'm just going to go into the comments now. During the inspection of the property following a structural fire, there was extensive, now I don't want to say a word that might feel injurious, but it's just hoarding, appeared hoarding conditions due to the nature and significant amount of accumulation of debris. Animal waste and animal related materials were documented both inside and outside the residence. The conditions observed constituted violation related to debris accumulation, sanitation, pest harborage, unsanitary and hoarding conditions revealed strong odors, including distinct cat urine smells inside the residence, overflowing litter boxes, large quantities of dog feces in the yard, cages, tires, dumped soil material, significant debris piles, Garbage and remnants of animal feed through the property were found to be in advanced state of decomposition. Multiple piles were also observed to be actively infested with maggots and flies. Hoarding conditions affected both interior and exterior of the building, involving animals and general debris. The condition presented before and after the incident support unsanitary accumulation of health risks. This is on the second case. I'm looking just to find violation, and it is in compliance to the state that the other violation on the first case covers the unsafe sanitary conditions.

Okay, so let me just make sure. So there's one, two, three, four, five. Which one are you referring to? Is it the contaminant?

It's the very first one, which is the unsafe condition. Oh, sorry. Sanitary and unsafe condition number two, the 301.2 responsibility.

Are we in the first case or the second case?

The first case is going to hold the items that are still left. You'll see as you go along that some of this stuff has been cleaned up.

Okay, I'm just trying to follow. Are you saying there's... You're about to put into the record that there is also a compliance on one of these five that's in the second? Correct. Which one of the five is my question?

42.23 NPC, Northport City Code.

So the first one. The first one. Okay.

You'll find on the second one that I'm going to be looking for compliance for all of the ones of the second case.

All five of them? Yes. Okay.

I want to be found in violation of the title. I understand. Yeah, okay. The second one is 59-1C1 of Northport City Code for allowed parking. And just to get... This is regarding the van that was parked, and it's already since been removed, but you'll see the picture of the van up here on the screen. This is the van that's in question for the allowed parking that was prohibited for an inoperable vehicle, which also is gonna be in compliance as of today, and I've also inspected recently yesterday on the property. Then we have... prohibited activities violations 3.7.3D of the Unified Land Development Code for prohibited activities, and it was raising and keeping of fowl or livestock. I know it has a bunch of things that talks about roosters and crowing chickens or any livestock not listed in the table above. They're talking about slaughtering hens and all the other extra stuff. We're just concerned about the number of chickens. So the maximum allowed is four gallus domestic hens per 10,000 square foot lot. No other types of fowl are allowed. Violation comments. Evidence on site indicated that the commercial or raising of excessive level of hens or fowl and other livestock. The maximum number of fowl permitted is four. However, Sarasota County Amnesty Services and also the health department and the fire department also in their reports to me were of excess in number amounts. So I took the conservative side of their estimates because there was a lot. The owner had removed approximately 20 or 30 surviving chickens, so those remaining surviving chickens were removed or removed during that time. following the fire. In addition to the surviving animals, a significant number of deceased animals were documented on site. Estimates, and this is estimates, included but are not limited to two turtles, 15 rabbits, 20 chickens, two chinchillas, four guinea pigs, 10 quail, 10 canaries, and at least one fish tank containing an unknown number of deceased fish in an incubator with approximately 30 or 50 unhatched eggs. These animals were subsequently removed from the property, but the owner, after authorization, was granted by the fire marshal. All this stuff is now no longer there on the property, so we'll be saying that it is in compliance at this date. which won't need to go forward. Now, I know other agencies are the ones that responded and gave me these reports. Those are the individuals that will be responsible for following those cases. Next violation was violation 3.7.3, the Unified Land Development Code, and it's regarding containment. It shall be unlawful for any person to allow fowl to run at large upon the streets, alleys, or other public spaces in the City of Northport or on the property of any other person. Stored feed shall be secured in run-proof residential lot behind the primary structure. Meet the setbacks requirements for accessory structures in the zoning districts. Maintain clean and sanitary conditions free from insects and rodents, offensive odors, detectable property boundaries, excessive noise, or other potential nuisances. and shall be contained within the covered chicken coop and fenced pennant areas. A building permit is not required for movable or prefabricated coops that's 12 square feet or less in size. Movable coops shall be removed and stored properly for all major storm events and prevent airborne debris. Chickens shall be stored appropriately for the major storm events. And this one I just put improper feed storage, animal feed present on site during the inspection, secure due to rodent proof and raccoon proof containers, loose feed, and the other sanitation requirements unnecessary for nuisance prevention. The ULDC requires movable coops and things of that nature to be properly secure for all major storm events, and I'm hoping that that'll continue moving forward. This is no longer an issue due to the items being cleaned up and stored more appropriately. I know there's still some left to be done, but we're gonna be tracking through while she continues to move through that process. And that covers all of the codes. Like I said, I was gonna look to put that in compliance as well, as it is no longer an issue on that property, but just to be found so that if anything in the future was to come back, we would then take care of it at that time.

All right. Before I move on to the property owner, I have just a couple of questions. This is all related to the first case, not to the second case. The 304.1.1 of the IPMC unsafe condition 8 roofing, as far as the maximum fine, that's the $250 a day, no max. Is that also the case for the 301.2, the unsafe and unsanitary condition?

Yes.

Okay, and then I think everything else you're saying is in compliance, so I don't really need to know anything else.

Yeah, and I will just state as well, I have been working with Wendy and her daughter and just meeting David today, we are on the same wavelength on timeframe allowing grace, because this is a traumatic event, fire. We do look to give them the time necessary to make the additional cleanups and get the required permits. So I'm looking for the maximum time to allow them that time and grace to do that.

Okay, yeah, we'll have that discussion, I'm sure, in just a minute here. All right, so before you go, you're here with the power of attorney? Yes, sir. Have you handed it in? I just need to see it. You want a hard copy of it? You can put it on the screen if you've got it.

In the supporting document? Oh, I have the old one.

Okay, yeah, it doesn't need to be a paper copy, but because you emailed it, well, let me just ask you, you want that to become part of the record, the later one that you emailed?

No, so the one she has in her email, we stand over for that backup document, and we'll be fine today.

So it's already in the record? All right, okay. Let me just take a quick look at it. I can get you my mouse if you want. That's fine. Okay. Can I do it over there? Yeah. Yeah, there we go. Okay, so yeah, this is a very, very specific power of attorney related to this. Okay. All right. So I am going to yeah, I'll step that into the record and then it's a valid power of attorney for purposes of this hearing. So state your name for the record and then and I saw that you got sworn so you don't need to state that. And then if you want to make a statement about sort of how you're related to the property, you can. You don't have to. And then, again, you can say anything you want to. You can ask questions or you can just, you know, start making statements.

Sure. My name is David Kalin, family friend. Okay. They approached me to come speak on their behalf. I know many times these cases get a little bit emotional, and given the trauma that they've gone through, total loss of their home, most of their belongings, as well as many of their personal pets, a lot of parrots, things like that were lost. So that is why I'm here to speak today, Your Honor. I've known the family for a while. I'm actually a, I run a feed store and farm out of Charlotte County, and the family has been our patrons for many years. And so we've built a very good rapport with them. And so that is my purpose for being here today is to speak on their behalf. I had the opportunity to speak with the supervisor over here in advance. We are on the same page. We don't deny that there were some issues on the property. Given the catastrophic nature of the fire, as well as the kind of hurried clean out during a fire situation, it tends to make a situation look even worse than it is. The family has been working diligently to not only clean up the pre-existing issues that we have discussed on that second case, but as well as everything going forward with the fire. There was a period of time after the 21st where there was really no access due to the unsafe conditions, the inspection for the determination of the fire, Health Department inspections and subsequently the insurance company. And it wasn't until about 14 days ago that the insurance company finally has issued a payment to the family. So being homeless with still making payments on a home and an apartment has been financially strained. So what we're really asking here for today is As the gentleman has seen, we are complying with the request, but we're asking for some additional time because it is going to take time to either get demolition permits or construction permits and engineering into the level of what it's going to take. So we're asking maybe to revisit this in 90 days, preferably a little bit longer, but we will entertain what the court would like to do on this. Uh, we do have some additional things we are working on at this time, try to speed this process up. Um, but we are actively working. To be 100% in compliance. Yeah.

And then let me also explain this. So, you know, what what Mr Kitty was talking about with the in compliance, but asking for a fact finding the impact of that is. that if it happens again, it'll come back as a repeat violation, which is a different process. So do you understand that?

I can assure you, Your Honor, that is not going to be a situation going forward.

All right. So you have no problem with finding in compliance today, but that there was a prior violation.

That is not a problem, Your Honor. What we are asking, though, is because the insurance amount is a very finite amount for them to try to find another home, which is most likely the ultimate outcome here. We're asking that you withhold the fines, as we were showing our due diligence to make this happen, so that it gives the homeowner the best opportunity to procure a new home and location, as well as be able to deal with the structure as quick as possible.

Alright, so in looking at, so we don't have hearings in November, we have the hearing on December 10th, so is Is that is that a date that the 2 of you have talked about? I'm agreeable to the date that they're talking about, which is that's a little bit more than 90 days is more like 100 days. But, um, but that then and then let me explain what happens and because this is. This is really important if. Let's say you're not 100% compliant on that when you come back. But let me say this. If you do reach compliance by the date that I'm about to announce here, you don't need to come back. But if you're like, 95% there, but you're not quite there yet. Um, then you do, I encourage you to come back. Because at that point in time, again, based upon testimony, I'm hearing from both sides. If there's testimony that yes, you know, we're almost at the finish line. I can continue that hearing at that point in time, but, um. But, you know, hopefully it'll be completely done by then. So. if there's no objection, the date I'm looking at would be a compliance date of December 5th, and then the fines would not begin until December 6th. And I'm looking at that.

The only thing I would say, just the stipulation, just so that everyone's aware, that's listening today. If there's a problem with the property, she's in contact with me so that we can get it rectified. So They're going to be maintaining the yard. They're going to be cleaning up the rest of the materials. This is going to be an ongoing thing. So it just allowed her the time to do what she needs to do for the problem. Right?

Absolutely. Okay. So hearing that there's no objective that I just have to bear with me, because I have to actually read my decision. And so. As to case number CE case 2602231, I am going to find that there is a violation of 304.1.1 of the IPMC for the unsafe conditions regarding the roofing. A fine of $250 a day with no max would commence on December 6th of 2026, if not brought into compliance by December 5th of 2026. Then as to through 1.2 of the IMPC, unsafe and unsanitary conditions. Again, this is really, I guess I would say, everything below the roof. It's still an unsafe condition. So, likewise, a fine of $250 a day with no max would commence on December 6th, 2026, if not brought into compliance by December 5th of 2026. Then as to At 302.5 of the IPMC, the road and park harborage, I'm going to find that there was a violation of that. However, it's in compliance as of today. and there's no further action that needs to be taken other than to continue to keep it in compliance. As to 309.1 of the IPMC, the infestation, again, I'm going to find that there was a violation of this ordinance, but it's in compliance today and no further action needs to be taken other than just to maintain it in compliance. Now, jumping to CE case 2602332 as to 42-23 of the Northport City Code accumulation of debris. I'm going to find that that is in compliance as of today. but it was not in compliance at one point in time. Again, no further action needs to be taken other than to maintain that in compliance. Then regarding Section 59.1B for the Norfolk City Code for the inoperable vehicle, Part of their again find that it is in compliance as of today, but it was in violation. No further action is necessary. You know, just maintain that in compliance as to 59 dash. 1, see 1 in the report city code for the allow parking and again, this is where it was parked. That it was in violation of that code section, but it's in compliance as of today. And again, no further action is necessary as long as it may that's maintained in compliance. And then regarding 3.7.3 D, the unified land development code for the being above the. The urban chicken ordinance limit of 4 ends and also the. that all the other animals that were here that is in compliance as of today, but that it was in violation at one point in time. And again, the only thing that has to happen is continued compliance of that. No further action is necessary. And then regarding 3.7.3 of the Unified Land Development Code for the containment of all the food in sealed containers, find that there was a violation of that, but it's in compliance as of today, so no further action is necessary as long as that remains in compliance. All right, that closes. Did I miss something? Oh, okay. I didn't... So... Oh, yeah, you're right. I didn't even mark that. Okay, also, I missed one. So this is back on the first case, which is CE case 2602231, and it's 302.1 of the IPMC sanitation. That's another one that is in compliance as of today. No, it's not? Okay.

That's the one we're holding until everything's cleaned up.

Okay, so are you just asking, well, are you asking that that one be on the same 100-day cycle as the other? Yes. Okay. All right. No problem with that. So... violation of that that is what's the what's the fine for typically fifty dollars a day up to the maximum of uh five thousand five thousand yeah okay so i'm gonna uh find that there is a violation of that today and um that a fine of fifty dollars a day with a maximum five thousand dollars will commence on december 6th of 2026 if not brought into compliance by december 5th of 2026. And that, I believe, is everything. All right. All right. Thank you all. I see it. Okay. The next one is case CE case 2601752. The property owner is Benny. Maldonado and the property address is 1937 Allegheny Lane. And whenever the city is ready, they may begin.

Good morning, Your Honor. My name is Gavin O'Neill, and I have been sworn. As of today, I had looked at the permit, talked to Planning and Zoning, so they are still continuing to work on it. It hasn't been issued yet, so they're working on a few things with the engineering plan, so I'd like to grant them time for continuance.

All right, so this is already, we already continued this case once. Yes, Your Honor. All right. So, so are you looking for just till next month? Yes, John. All right. Do you have any objection to continuing this till next month? All right. So we'll continue this case till next month's area. Okay. And then again, if you get it all resolved, you don't have to come back here. Okay. All right. Yes. Okay. Thanks. Just stay in contact with this gentleman over here. All right now, number 3. The one that we just heard? Oh, okay. So, let's see if it's on page 19. Okay, I found it. Let me just see. Okay, I'm gonna call and then I'm gonna ask a question after I call the case. So the next case is CE case 2601750. The property owner is Jurion, LLC. The property address is 2248 Ann Arbor Road, but we also have a Donna Marie Busca who has signed. Okay, so how are you related to the property?

I don't know. Mine's 2268 Ann Arbor.

Oh, yeah, that's a different case number. Oh, it's on the same road. Okay, hold on. Let's just make sure that you have a case today. So, the case number is wrong. 2268? Yeah.

Is there a case for that? No, that was front. But it's not for this year because it was a property owner change.

So, OK, so there was there a recent change in ownership. Yes. OK. Yeah. And so so you have to re-notice. Is that what you're saying? Yeah.

So they're in touch with you, ma'am, if you register property owner now? Not yet. I'm doing it now. So you can correct the problem.

Okay.

It was like, you know, both picked up that they picked that up.

All right, we'll send someone out to Edmila. Okay. All right. You don't have to stay if you don't want to. You can if you want, but you have to go. Yeah.

We don't have your case today, so.

All right. I appreciate you.

Okay, got it. All right. I apologize for that. Yeah, we had 2 cars signed up for the same case. So we need to get that cleared up. Okay. So, again, I announced the case and the property owner and the address. So, whenever the city is ready, they may begin.

Good morning. This is a 2nd hearing case, by the way. Good morning, Your Honor. My name is Gavin O'Neill. I'm the Code of Functions Inspector for the City of Northport and I have been sworn. Case number 26-0175 is found in violation at 0723 of 26 hearing. At the last time that I was out of the property, which was the 25th, there has been no changes to the property. I would like to request that you sign the order assessing the fine.

All right. Again, I think you were here, you got sworn, right? Yes. Okay. Just state your name for the record.

It's Isfahan Richard Ekladi.

Okay. And how are you related to the LLC?

I'm the managing member of the company. Okay.

All right. So again, you can ask questions or just...

I'm just here that the happy that the violation is no longer there. As of yesterday, 26th of August, I removed all the debris and rebars that was mentioned by the inspector previously, and the violation is good. I just apologize for the delays. It was a hardship, financial hardship, and we know that the rainy days also was a factor in that. I'm just glad that I could fix the violation.

Okay, we may need to get Mr. Radushi back in here. Actually, if he's saying that he removed it yesterday, Your Honor, what I'd like to do is ask for a continuance so that we can go out and verify it.

I just, for the record, I have the- Yeah, but you probably want to look your eyes on it, don't you?

We would have to have a date stamp time for it.

Okay, so yeah, so here's what we're gonna, if you have no objection, we'll continue this till next month. If what he's going to do is he's going to go back, he's going to verify that it's in compliance, you don't have to come back. It'll just be marked in compliance. You understand that? Yes. All right. So we'll continue this case till next month.

And just for one more thing that I talked to the supervisor yesterday, and I would make sure that all the properties I own by the company has been cleared and is compliant.

All right. Thank you.

Thank you.

Okay. Do you know what page four is on? I think it's up towards the front. Thank you. Page six. All right, the next one is CEK 2602066. The property owner is Nikolai Smirna. I probably butchered that name. Apologize. 5553 Schaefer Avenue.

Good morning, Your Honor. I'm Kevin LaPointe, Code Enforcement Inspector for the City of Northport, and I have been sworn. CE case 26-02066 was initially inspected on 6-16 of 2026. Case adjusting the violation of use and occupancy ordinance 2015-10... Section 111, Certificate of Occupancy and Completion. No certificate of occupancy has been given and they are residing in the property. The property has been inspected on multiple occasions and most recently on 8-25-26. and I have five photos to present as evidence. The photos are true and accurate depiction of the property located at 5553 Shaver Ave, North Port, Florida.

And so there's an open permit on this house, I assume, right?

There is no, it's an expired permit per the building department, and the impact fees have not been paid. Okay. All right.

So basically, for compliance, it needs the final inspection and the impact fees paid, and then... Yes. Okay. All right. I understand that. All right. You may state your name for the record, and you've been sworn.

Yes.

Okay. Okay. So now it's your turn.

I already start paying the fees, so I can finish paying them. So we already passed all of the inspections, all the finals that's done. You just need to pay, finish paying the fees. When do you think you will have the impact fees paid? If you can give me 90 days. What is the total of the impact fees? It was $10,000, but then I came here and they were saying they raised up the fees. I don't know what's the reason, but when I paid my payment about three weeks ago, it's showing the balance of $8,190. So now I'm not sure, yeah. I paid $2,500 and I want to pay next week another $5,000.

I see Mr. Kitty is up at the podium. So he's asking for 90 days. I want to hear the city's position.

William Kitty, Code Enforcement Field Supervisor. How long have you been residing in the residence?

No, this year. We moved in this year.

When this year did you move in?

Like the beginning.

January?

Yeah.

So we're finding violation due to them moving into a property that has not been given clearance and they're living there now. We're not looking to give extensions of the timeframe because they're living in the property. We're just looking for the minimum time that would be your discretion.

Which would be more like 30 days instead of that. Correct. Okay, so the city's position, which is a pretty reasonable position, is that you've had the benefit of living in this for all of this calendar year so far. And again, I guess if you moved out, That would bring it into compliance, but you don't want to probably move out. You want to just get the certificate of occupancy and stay there. I mean, I will tell you this. I'm inclined to go with the city's position on this, but I want to give you the last word of anything else you want to say.

I guess if it's that, I mean, I'll try to finish it. I mean, pay it back in the 30 days. All right.

Okay. I am going to find that there is a violation of Section 111 of the Florida Building Code for no certificate of occupancy for this, this new structure, this new house that, and it is obviously occupied. And a fine of $50 a day with a maximum of $5,000 will commence on September 22 of 2026, if not brought into compliance by September 21. of 2026, so you've got until September 21. September, yeah, next month, the 21st, basically a month. Okay. All right, thank you. All right, thank you. Yep, next case. And we're going to need the clerk to swear this witness because they came in late. C, case 2601932. The property owner is Corey Gankos and Danielle Salvo. And the property address is 5230 Vixen Terrace. You can come to this podium right over here. And before we get started with you, I want you to just go ahead. The clerk is going to administer the oath to you.

Can everyone wishing to provide testimony please stand and raise your right hand? Do you swear or affirm that the testimony you are about to provide is true and accurate to the best of your knowledge? So help you God. Yes.

All right, so the city will go first, and then you'll have your turn. So whenever the city is ready.

Good morning, Your Honor. My name is Gavin O'Neill. I'm a code enforcement inspector for the city of Northport, and I've been sworn. CE case 26-01932 was initially inspected by Blake at 6-10 of 2026. The changes on the property include the violation description of prohibited parking in the right-of-way, 59-1B1 of prohibited parking. The property has been inspected on multiple occasions, most recently of 8-25 of 2026 by myself, and I saw three cars parked in the right-of-way, as was seen in that picture. Still looked identical. There are six photos to present as evidence. The photos are a true and accurate depiction of the property located at 5230 Vixen Terrace in Northport, Florida. All right.

Okay. Again, so just state your name for the record. I know you're supporting it.

Danielle Salvo.

Okay. And again, you can ask questions or you can just make a statement. I think you missed the preliminary. Sometimes people will sit there and say, oh, I realize I'm not in compliance, but I'll be in compliance by a certain date.

So the red car is my son's. We just bought the home in June. And It's a car that he bought. It doesn't even run. So I had it towed because it also had no tags, which I knew was also the issue. I had it towed by Alvarez Towing Company last week. Um, I didn't want the car there to begin with. Um, the Lexus is mine. That's the car in the back, but as long as it's with the right of traffic, and it's not in the road. That's not okay.

No, that changed back in September of 23. it's my 1st home.

So, and. The home we've been renting was in Northport, but it wasn't an issue. So I, so it has to be all the cars have to be in the driveway.

They don't have to all be in the driveway if it's on your property. So they can't be in the right of way at all. It can be in the driveway, it can be on your property if it's on an improved surface. If you can access the side of your property or the rear of the property, as long as it's not within the easement, then you do not need an improved surface.

And the right way probably extends about 10 feet off the edge of pavement. Yeah, 6 and 6.

6 and 6, Your Honor. Okay.

Okay, so I've been parking that way because I thought it just had to be in the right of traffic and not in the road. I didn't realize that it couldn't be in the grass at all right there. So should I, my car, this sounds a little ridiculous, but my car leaks oil and we just bought the home. So my husband, my boyfriend hasn't been letting me park in the driveway. So pretty much I need to put my car in the driveway.

So with that, that's a lucid discharge. That's, Very bad, there's an officer right behind you so dumping oil into the city right away is like, yeah, because that's the storm drainage for the city.

So anybody with well, not dumping oil, but it just it's an old car.

I'm not trying to the so. Well, we're not, we're not here today, your honor. Yeah. So. I mean, you want to explain a little bit about what some people do to the side of their driveways, but they have to make an improvement. They can't just... Can you explain that?

Majority of people saw an improved surface to make it a little easier. Malt, shell, gravel, pavers that are not concreted in, you can put those on the side of your property on your driveway side as an extension. Yeah, we do plan on... Okay. So most people, like I've seen people that have the oil leakages, if you put shell down, it helps stop it. It's a... small solution for the problem, but there's still obviously the oil leaking problem.

It's a really small leak. He just didn't want to stay in the driveway. It's just, it's not like it's dumping oil either way. I didn't realize, I've been just, the other car's gone, but I've just been parking my car the other way. I thought it was just because it was against the traffic.

And then a quick temporary solution is probably just to have some cardboard on the driveway. Yeah. Um, okay. Is there anything else you want to say? No, I mean, I mean, it's in violation right now, so I'm going to find this in violation. What I'm going to do is I'm going to give you 25 days to bring it into compliance though. Okay. And as I said, long term, what he suggested with shell on the side of the driveway is probably the long term solution. Short term solutions, probably put some cardboard underneath the car when you park in the driveway. So, I am going to find that there is a violation of 59.1 B, 1, or the Northport city code for prohibited parking, acknowledging that, I guess, have you noticed that the red car is gone now?

The red car was not there when I had gone there. There was a 3rd car though. Your honor. Right.

It wasn't the right. So, yeah, you understand now, you know. Where all 3 of those cars are none of that can happen in the future.

So I just don't understand though, because all around the houses all around me. They, they park on the in the browse, there's even a Jeep down the street that doesn't even have a plate that's been sitting there.

We probably are working on it right now. It's just 1 person per area. So sometimes it's a little bit. Those people will be coming here shortly. Okay.

All right. So the violation of that code, a fine of $10 a day with a maximum $1,000 will commence on September 22 of 2026, if not brought into compliance by September 21 of 2026. All right. Thank you. Thank you. I think, is that all the green cards? Okay, so now let's go back to continued cases. CE case 2600977. Property owner is Kelsey McCloud. Property address is 3790 Abba Lane. And this is a continued second hearing case.

I'm Josh Preston, Code Enforcement Inspector with the City of Northport and I have been sworn. CEK 26-00977 was initially inspected on March 27, 2026. It was found in violation at the May 28, 2026 hearing. There have been no changes, and I ask that you assess the fines, please.

Okay, I will sign the order assessing the fine. Next is CE case 2601616. This is a tree case. Yes.

I spoke with the property owner yesterday. He had the... Survey completed yesterday, and they asked for additional time to get the paperwork from the surveyors to submit it there. So they're, they're taking.

They're making prior. Yes. Okay. So you're okay continuing this till next month. We'll continue this case till next month. The next one is 26 01666 property owners, Randy and Ashley wells. The parcel ID number is 0964083122.

Good morning, Your Honor. My name is Gavin O'Neill, Code Enforcement Inspector for Sydney Northport, and I've been sworn. CE case 26-01666 was initially inspected by Tony on 5-28-2026. So for this one, it's a culvert with no sidewalks. So, Your Honor, Parcels actually not even combined with the actual property itself. They built a gravel driveway, which is already... Oh, this is like behind their house? This is behind their house. So they're parking on a vacant lot and they have no soil and no driveway. Okay. So what was required for them was culvert maintenance to get the gravel out of the soil as it's not in a pervious surface. And then they also needed to apply for a CZC permit to continue for a driveway and they have done neither of those. Okay. All right.

Just bear with me just a second here. I'm going to find that there's a violation of 42-24A1A, the Northport City Code for this, basically having this thing where there should be a culvert. A fine of $10 a day with a maximum of $1,000 will commence. on September 22 of 2026, if not brought into compliance by September 21 of 2026. And then I'm going to find that a violation of Section 2.2.5 of the Unified Land Development Code for Again, this is also related to the, there's gotta be a culvert in this particular location. So if I have $25 a day with a maximum of $2,000, we'll commence on September 22 of 2026, if not brought into compliance by September 21 of 2026. Moving on to first hearings. Case, CE case 2601715. Property owner is Ronard Garcia. Parcel ID number is 0967058821.

Good morning, Your Honor. My name is Gavin O'Neill, code enforcement inspector for the city of Northport. I've been sworn. So the property that you see in this picture does have a land clearing permit. However, all they did was just store everything on the property itself and some of it towards the right of way with causing damage from the vehicle in there.

And this is a property that has, it's a swell in the front. Okay. All right. I'm going to find that there's a violation of 70-19 Norfolk City Code for damage in the right of way, basically by all the debris and then all the probably equipment that went in and out of there to do this. lot clearing which again this testimony says there is a permit for but a five to ten dollars a day with a maximum of one thousand dollars for the violation of 70-19 uh the north port city code uh will commence on september 22 of 2026 if not brought into compliance by september 21 of 2020 excuse me 2026 not 2022. Next is CE case 2601935. Property owner is Lewis Tucker and Rosalynn Buckton Tucker. The property address is 4491 LaFrance Avenue.

My name is Gavin O'Neill, Code Force Inspector for the City of Northport. I've been sworn. CE case 26-01935 was initially inspected by Tony on 6-10 of 2026. The violations on the property include 42-77A of Northport City Code, abandoned property. We've been told that this property has been vacant for over a year, as well as violation of the Florida Building Code, R4501.17.1. for residential swimming barrier requirement. In the photo, you can actually see a massive hole within the screen that even I could fit through. And then we're asking them for an abandoned property registration request as well. So we've had, like it's been inspected on multiple occasions, most recently by myself, 25th of August of 2026. Neither of us had any prior contact with the property owner. Okay.

Help me out here with what's the maximum fines for each one of these violations. Let's start with the first one, 42-77A, the abandoned property. What's the maximum fine on that? Should be $10 a day with a max of $1,000. And then the R4501.17, is that the $50 a day with a maximum of $5,000 or is that the $250 with no max? That's not the $250 with no max. It's the $550 with $5,000. And then I assume the registration, that's another $10 a day fine. Okay. All right. Thank you. So I'm going to find there's a violation of 42-77A of the Norfolk City Code. failure to deal with this abandoned property things like the glass window and need a repair and the opening in the pool cage. dollars a day with a maximum of one thousand dollars will commence on September 22 of 2026 if not brought into compliance by September 21 of 2026. Also, fine violation of R4501.17 in the Florida Building Code for unsafe pool, you know, specifically the, you know, there's, there's no barrier to access to this pool. A fine of fifty dollars a day with a maximum of five thousand dollars will commence on September 22 of 2026, if not brought into compliance by September 21 of 2026. And then fine of violation of 42-74, Norfolk City Code for the registration, failing to register a property that's at the risk of abandonment, a fine of $10 a day with a maximum of $1,000 will commence on September 22 of 2026, if not brought into compliance by September 21 of 2026. Okay, I'm gonna read the next two cases in compliance. CE case 26-01947. Property owners pray their holdings LLC. The property address is 4424 Baroda Avenue is in compliance. Next case, CE case 26-01953. Property owner is Fong Nguyen and Thanh Dinh. and the property address is 3858 Fountain Blue Street, and that is in compliance. Next case is CE case 2602051. The property owner is Talia Investments, LLC. The property address is 2597 Pickard Lane.

My name is Gavin O'Neill, code enforcement inspector for the City of Northport. I've been sworn CE case 26-02051 was initially inspected by Blake on 5-26 of 2026 for accumulation of debris, 42-23 of Northport City Code for treason underbrush laying in the right of way. Property has been inspected on multiple occasions, including most recently of 8-25 by myself, I've not had contact nor has Blake had contact with the property owner prior to today.

Alright, I'm going to file a violation of Section 42-23 of the Norfolk City Code for the accumulation of debris. All these cut trees mostly looks like mostly palm trees. A fine of $10 a day with a maximum of $1,000 will commence on September 22 of 2026 if not brought into compliance by September 21 of 2026. Next is CE case 2601081. Property owners Christopher and Lori The parcel ID number is 0959116543.

My name is Gavin O'Neill, code enforcement inspector for the City of Northport and I've been sworn. CE case 26-02081 was initially inspected by Tony on 06-16 of 2026 for accumulation of 42-23 of Northport City code for debris consisting of multiple trees pushed into the neighboring lot that was as you can see was from the construction site originally property has been inspected on multiple occasions most recently by myself on 8 25 2026 i or tony have not had contact with the property owner prior to today

Okay. I'm going to find a violation of Section 42-23 of the Norfolk City Code for accumulation of debris, this construction debris. It looked like some of it also was, looked like, like a broken hurricane shutter or something there. A fine of $10 a day with a maximum $1,000 will commence on September 22 of 2026 if not brought into compliance by September 21 of 2026. I'm going to read the next one in the compliance. CEK is 2602128, property owner is Stanley Cochran, and the property address is 2232 LaTarche Avenue is in compliance. No?

Sorry, I didn't want to get too far ahead. On that debris, there's also tires and things like that. I just wanted to make sure. Oh, that was the other one. The other one that we were just talking about here.

Okay. Yeah, I mean, I think there's enough there. Just wanted to make sure that was clear. Okay, yeah. You want me to do this one? Okay, the next case is case number CE case 2602167. The property owner is Marissa Kippen, and the property address is 8396 Triunfo Avenue.

Your Honor, my name is Gavin O'Neill, Code and Portion Inspector for the City of Northport. I've been sworn for CE case 2602167, initially inspected by Woody on 6-22-2026. Violation includes sanitary and unsafe condition, IPMC of 2021, a 301.2 responsibility. So the violation comment says that there's no water supplied to the residents since February 1st of 2025, and the water meter was removed due to excess amount owed. So neither myself or Woody have had contact with the property owner prior to today.

Okay. And there's always a cat living there. I'm going to find that this is the one that is $250 a day, no max, correct? I think so because it is considered an unsafe. I'm going to find a violation of 301.2 of the IPMC for unsafe and unsanitary conditions. There's a house with no water service because the water meter has been removed. and there's some appearance that people are trying to live there, so a fine of $250 a day with no max will commence on September 22 of 2026, if not brought into compliance by September 21 of 2026. All right, so now we're going to go to second hearing cases, right? CEK 2600341. Property owner is Sandra Cooper and the property address is 6515 Old Court Street.

Good morning, your honor. My name is getting a good force inspector for the city and what I've been sworn case number 26, 0, 0, 3, 1, 4, 1 was found in violation at the 72326 hearing. There has been no changes to the to the property and I request that you sign the order.

So I will sign the order assessing the fines. Next case 26, 0, 0, 9, 1, 2. Property owner is Guion Sandoval and Nicole Roman. Property address is 1313 Wise Drive.

Good morning, Your Honor. I'm George White, Code Inspector for the City of Norfolk, and I have been sworn. Case number 26-00912 was found in violation at the 7-23-26 hearing. There have been no changes to the property and I request that you sign the order assessing the fines.

I will sign the order assessing the fines. Next CEK is 2601048. Property owner is Gerald and Ruby Stackhouse and the property address is 3147 California Terrace.

My name is Gavin O'Neill, code enforcement inspector for the City of Northport, I've been sworn. Case number 26-01048 was found in violation of the 72326 hearing. There's been no changes to the property and I request you sign the order assessing the fines. I will sign the order assessing the fines.

Next CE case 2601412. The property owner is Josian Clark. The parcel ID number is 1128227620.

Your Honor, my name is Gavin O'Neill, Code Force Inspector for the City of North Portland. I've been sworn. Case number 26-01412 was found a violation at the 07-2326 hearing. There have been no changes to the property and I request to sign the order assessing the fine. I will sign the order assessing the fine.

Next is CE case 2601434. Property owner is Robert and Kimberly Russell. The parcel or the address is 3237 Royal Palm Drive.

I'm Josh Preston, Code Enforcement Inspector for the City of Northport, and I have been sworn. CEK 26-01434 was initially expected on May 1st, 2026. It was also found in violation at the July 23rd, 2026 hearing. There have been no changes, and I ask that you assess the fines, please.

I will sign the order assessing the fines. Next is CEK 2601439. The property owner is David Bates and the parcel or the property address is 4255 Grove Street.

Good morning, my name is Gavin O'Neill, code enforcement inspector for the city of Northwood. I've been sworn case number 26-01439 was found in violation of the 7-23 of 26 hearing. There have been no changes to the property and I request that you sign the order assessing the fine.

I will sign the order assessing the fine. Next CE case 26-01447. The property owners are Mania and Raul Lejeune and the property address is 6220 Fronda Avenue.

On your honor, my name is Gavin O'Neill, court enforcement inspector for the City of Northport. I've been sworn. Case number 2601447 was found in violation of the 72326 hearing. There have been no changes to the property and I request you to sign the order assessing the fines.

I will sign the order assessing the fines. Next is CE case 2601453. The property owners are Neil and Elizabeth Randall. The property address is 3694 Crandon Road.

Morning, Your Honor. My name is Gavin O'Neill, Code Force Inspector for the City of Northport. I've been sworn case number 26-01453 was found in violation at the 07-2326 hearing. There have been no changes to the property and I request that you sign the order assessing the fine.

I will sign the order assessing the fines. Next is CE case 2601471. Property owners are Louis Tucker and Rosalynn Buckton Tucker. And the property address is 4491 LaFrance Avenue.

Good morning, Your Honor. My name is Gavin O'Neill, Code Enforcement Inspector for the City of Northport. I've been sworn case number 26-01471 is kind of a violation of the 07-2326 hearing. There have been no changes to the property and I request that you sign the order assessing the fine.

I will sign the order assessing the fine. Next is CE case 2601527. The property owner is Bethel Solar LLC. The property address is 3259 Masuko Avenue.

I'm Josh Preston, Code Enforcement Inspector for the City of Northport, and I have been sworn. CE case 26-01527 was initially inspected on May 12th, 2026. It was also found in violation at the July 23rd, 2026 hearing. There have been no changes, and I ask that you assess the fine.

I will sign the order assessing the fine. Next is CE case 2601529. The property owner is Barbara Perkowski. The property address is 7873 McPhail Avenue.

Good morning, Your Honor. I'm George White, Co-Inspector for the City of Northport, and I have been sworn. Case number 2601529 was found in violation at the 72326 hearing There have been no changes to the property and I request that you sign assessing the fine.

I will sign the order assessing the fines. Next is CE case 2601559. The property owner is Christopher Overstreet and Jessica Clayton.

The property address is 4825 Escalante Drive. Good morning, Your Honor. My name is Gavin O'Neill, Code Enforcement Inspector for the City of Northport, and I've been sworn. Case number 26-01559 was found in violation of the 7-23-26 hearing. There have been no changes to the property, and I request that you sign the order assessing the fine.

I will sign the order assessing the fine. Next is CE case 2601580. The property owner is Florida 3 Management, LLC. The property address is 2173 Halblom Street.

I'm Josh Preston, Code Enforcement Inspector for the City of Northport, and I have been sworn. CE case 26-01580 was initially inspected on May 18th, 2026. It was also found in violation at the July 23rd, 2026 hearing. There have been no changes, and I ask that you assess the fines, please.

I will sign the order assessing the fine. Next is CEK 2601585. The property owner is Bethel Solar LLC. The property address is 3165 Stockton Avenue.

Morning, Your Honor, my name is Gavin O'Neill, Code Enforcement Inspector for the City of Northport. I've been sworn case number 26-01585, respondent violation at the 07-2326 hearing. There have been no changes to the property and I request that you sign the order assessing the fine. I will sign the order assessing the fine.

Next is CE case 2601590. The property owner is Bethel Solar LLC. The property address is 1501

for Roscoe Lane. Good morning, your honor. My name is Gavin O'Neill, code enforcement inspector for the city of North where I've been sworn. Case number 26-01590 was found in violation at this 07-2326 hearing. There have been no changes to the property and I request that you sign the order assessing the fine.

I will sign the order assessing the fine. Exit CEK is 2601591. The property owner is Bethel Solar LLC. The parcel ID number is 1005011118.

When you're on, my name is Gavin O'Neill, code enforcement inspector for the city of Northport. I've been sworn case number 26-01591 was found a violation at the 72326 hearing. There have been no changes to the property, and I request that you sign the order assessing the fine.

I will sign the order assessing the fine. Next is CEK 2601593. The property owner is Raywood Trust 11. The property address is 1778 Raywood Avenue.

Your Honor, my name is Gavin O'Neill, Code Enforcement Inspector for the City of North Dakota. I've been sworn case number 26-01593 was found in violation at the 7-23-26 hearing. There have been no changes to the property and I request that you sign the order assessing the fine.

I will sign the order assessing the fine. Next is CE case 2601-604. The property owner is Thomas Lagasse. The property address is 5846 Spearman Circle.

Your Honor, my name is Gavin O'Neill, Code Enforcement Inspector for the City of Northport. I've been sworn. Case number 26-01604 was found in violation of the 72326 hearing. There have been no changes to the property and I request that you sign the order assessing the fine. I will sign the order assessing the fine.

Next is CE case 2601624. The property owner is Avery Francis. The property address is 7924 Jeffrey Avenue.

Good morning, Your Honor. My name is Gavin O'Neill, Code Enforcement Inspector for the City of North Broadway. I've been sworn case number 26-01624 was found in violation at the 7-23-26 hearing. There have been changes to the property, including an issued permit, so the property is now in compliance.

All right, we will mark this one in compliance, so there'll be no fines. All right, next is... I think the last CEK is 2601780. The property owner is All Renewed Services, LLC. The address, property address is 2690 Inland Avenue.

I'm Josh Preston, Code Enforcement Inspector for the City of North Port, and I have been sworn. Case number 26-01780 was initially inspected on June 2nd, 2026, and found a violation at the July 23rd, 2026 hearing. There have been no changes, and I ask that you assess the fines, please.

All right, I will sign the order assessing the fine. I thought we were going to have a public comment card. Okay, I guess they changed their mind. So seeing that there's no public comment card signed up, we have no public comments and did I just double check before I adjourned? Okay, then it is 11 or excuse me, 1018 and we are adjourned.