Citizen's Advisory Committee - Special Meeting

Good morning. The City of Port St. Lucie special magistrate hearing for Wednesday, 05/13/2026 is called to order. It's just after 09:00 in the morning. My name is Keith Davis. I'm a special magistrate appointed by the city to preside over today's hearing. I'd like to start, as always, by inviting everyone to stand and join me in the pledge of allegiance.

K.

Thank you. Let's go ahead and get city staff sworn in who will be testifying in today's hearings.

Please raise your right hand. Do you swear or affirm the testimony you offer today is the truth and nothing but the truth?

Thank you. Okay.

I have previously reviewed and approved the minutes noted on today's agenda from previous hearings on February 11, March 11 and March 18. So for today, are there any late abatements or postponements to note on the agenda?

We do not have any late abatements or postponements.

K. Then the agenda as published is approved. Okay. So I think we're doing the solid waste cases first?

Yes. We'll just read in the solid waste cases. Nobody is present for them, so I'll put them on record and read how they were notified.

Okay.

Number one, case number 26Dash00686. Respondent address is 1165 Southwest Sutter Avenue. Number two, case number 26Dash01837. Respondent address, 681 Southwest McCoy Avenue. And number three, case number 26Dash02146. Respondent address is 410 Southwest Kentwood Road.

Alright. And

then I'll put on record on how

put anything into the record on those other than that?

Just how the their their office notified them. A notice of hearing or notice of the certification of find was sent to the violator by certified mail return receipt requested to the address listed in the tax collector's office for tax notices or to the address listed in the county property appraiser's database. If the green card is returned, is placed in the file, and it's either signed, unsigned, or unclaimed. Ten days before the hearing, the agenda was posted on the bulletin board in the lobby of Port St. Lucie City Hall.

Also, a notice of hearing was posted on the property in question along with an affidavit of posting, which included a copy of the notice posted in the date and place places of its posting. If the certification was card was not returned to the Office of Solid Waste, then within ten days before the hearing, posting is completed in the same manner as if the card was returned uncleaned as stated above. The photos shown at today's hearing are kept and maintained as public records of the city of Port St. Lucie's Office of Solid Waste.

Alright then. I will find proper notice and sign the appropriate orders, for those three matters. Vacate request is next?

Yes. We'll do number four, case number 25Dash12397. Respondent address 2602 Southwest Monterey Lane.

Good morning. Wesley Armstrong, deputy director of Neighborhood Services for the record. Regarding the the joint motion to vacate, the city has entered into an agreement with the respondent to vacate the the violation hearing order stating that there is no longer an open or active case relating to the property. The violation is considered null, void and with no legal effect. The violation will not be referenced as a prior or repeat violation in any future enforcement action. And there has not been or will be no lien fine or any monetary penalty associated to this violation. And the city attorney's office has reviewed and agreed to the vacate request.

Is there anybody here on behalf of the respondent on this one? No. Okay. So I do have the joint motion fully executed. It's in proper form. I will sign that order vacating as requested. Thank you. Yes, sir. Okay. Where cases. Only have folks

Yes. So

next, we're gonna go ahead and take cases for the folks who are present this morning. So when your case gets called, if you would please come on up to the front of the room to the table or the podium that's over here to my right, and I'll be able to see you and hear you in the microphone. We'll be able to record what you say from there. Generally, the way I'm going to proceed is I'll hear from the city first and take the city's testimony, review any evidence or documents that are in the Citi's file, which you'll also be able to observe on the monitors around the room. Once Citi's concluded its presentation and told me how it recommends the case be resolved.

At that point, I will come over to you. Have you sworn in just like all the city's witnesses were sworn in? And then I'll be happy to hear from you if you have any questions you can ask. If not, you can simply tell me about what's going on with the case. And then once I've heard everything from everyone, in all likelihood, an order will be entered today that resolves the matter. In the event that you brought any additional documents that you want me to consider additional photographs relevant to your case, that will be the time to produce those. And, so that's how we'll proceed, and, let's go ahead and call the first case.

Number eight, code officer Gomez. Case number 26Dash03824. Respondent, Michelle Thew. Respondent address is 2043 Southeast Brookshire Boulevard.

Morning, sir. Good morning. Officer Goldman has previously sworn. This case concerns the property at 2043 Southeast Berkshire Boulevard, Port Saint Lucie, Florida. On 03/17/2026, an inspection was done and photos taken showing the following violation. Section one fifty eight point two eleven storage or accumulation of materials, refuse, and waste materials prohibited. The photos depict an accurate representation of the property at the time the photos were taken. Notice of violation was issued on 03/18/2026. Respondent had until 03/28/2026, to bring the property into compliance. Compliance was not achieved by such date, so a notice hearing was furnished on 04/21/2026, a certified male.

On 04/29/2026, proper service was achieved by posting the property with a notice of hearing. Recommendation is as follows. The city requested respondent be ordered to comply with the site provisions of the city of Port St. Lucie code by 05/20/2026, and if not in compliance by that date, then a hearing be held to determine a fine to be imposed against subject property. This is the day of the posting, and there's items here on the trailer.

Here's a closer view of whatever items there are on the trailer. They're undiscernible at this point. The items here in front of the garage table, There's a floor jack as well. Then there's some items in the truck. There's items here on the back of the truck.

And this is the other truck that has items in the back of it. This is just another picture of I believe it's a lawnmower or whatnot in front of the garage. And that's all the photos of this open storage, sir.

Alright. Anything else from the city?

No, sir.

Alright. Let me get you sworn in, ma'am, and then I'll be happy to from you.

Yes, Please raise your right hand. Do you swear or affirm the testimony you offer today is the truth and nothing but the truth? Yes, ma'am. And please state your name for

the record. Michelle Lee Tu. Thank you.

Thank you, ma'am. As I said, if you have any questions for officer Gomez, you may ask. Otherwise, the floor is yours.

I understand that. On what date was it that you went out and said it was not in compliance? The because it is now.

There wasn't these photos taken Yeah.

On It May is now. It is in compliance now. Then the stuff on the trailer is equipment for the lawn mower that is underneath the garage that he is working on.

Items on the trailer can't can't be can't be there.

That's still considered open around the neighborhood that are on the trailer on trailers. They're at night, but that's when the items are there. And I just drove past this one at 2741 Southeast Malauka Boulevard on the way here, and there's more items on this trailer, clothing items.

Was that a question?

Well, I'm just making a statement that Okay.

So right now, do you have any other questions for officer Gomez? No. Okay. Then you can so what what is your statement then?

Well, my statement is I respectfully object to the enforcement action brought against me because the city's enforcement has been selective, arbitrary, and inconsistent in the equal protection of cause of fourteenth amendment. The conditions cited on my property are not unique. Similar properties throughout my neighborhood maintain multiple vehicles, trailers, parking on non paved areas, and outdoor storage. Yet those properties are not cited and or repeatedly per or repeatedly prosecuted.

What evidence do you have that they're not cited? I'm sorry.

Well, I have like I said,

I have

Let me

tell you something. You know, people come here all the time and tell me how they're targeted and it's selective and it's just them and everyone else is in violation and nobody else gets cited. Today, this is a pretty light agenda. I have 25 other cases besides you. I sit up here multiple times a month.

Usually, the agenda has 50 or more cases, none of which are you. So don't come up here and tell me that the city is targeting you. See page after page of violation after violation. And if you think this is the first time I've seen somebody cited for accumulation of outdoor storage, you're sadly mistaken. So I can't stand it when people come here and tell me they're being targeted because they see all these other violations out there.

How do you know that none of those cases either are in the pipeline or have prosecuted. And just because somebody comes to code enforcement doesn't always mean that they comply. I can sign an order and people say, well, I don't really care. I'm not going to do anything. I'll let daily fines run. And that's what happens. So please don't sit here and tell me that you're being targeted without and and you're the only one. So let's let's move on from that argument because that never carries weight with me, and that's why.

It's how I feel.

Okay.

Well, then you understand how I is there anything else that you would like to tell me about this? You did say it's in compliance at this point.

Yes. I did. Okay.

Except for there's, like, there's lawn mower stuff in on the trailer for the lawn mower. He's working on the one lawn mower.

Okay. So, officer Gomez, how does that work?

It still has to be removed from the trailer. Everything that we put out here has to be removed from outside. The only thing we allow is barbecue grill, patio furniture, the trash cans, the water hoses and planters, and children's toys. And that's that's the the extent of what can be outside. The propane tank can be outside because it's a fixture of of whatever they're using it for. But

If if there's equipment on a trailer, can if if the trailer's enclosed, does that if I'm not suggesting how to handle this. I'm just it's a question.

Yes, sir. If the trailer was an enclosed trailer and they had items inside, of course, we don't inspect, an enclosed trailer because that's an invasion of privacy for the the trailer and and the personnel. But an open trailer with open storage items on it that are viewable, then it has to be removed. Okay.

So if I'm hearing ma'am, if I'm hearing you correctly, everything is taken care of with the exception of the

Rod mower and the equipment that is on the trailer.

Okay.

Everything else is put up. The stuff in the back of my truck goes to my truck.

Is the trailer something that, like, comes and goes every day type of thing, or is it just sitting there?

No. No. It doesn't come and go every day. It comes and goes every once in

a while. Well, if everything else is done, I mean, I I do I guess you have now advised the city that you've that you have moved forward. I don't know.

We still leave the inspection in place, sir. That way it gives time to remove the items from the trailer, which is by May 20 and then the inspection would be on May 21.

So that's another week.

Alright.

Here's what I'm gonna do in this case. It sounds like at the very least, it has moved property has moved closer to compliance, if not being in compliance. But I always appreciate when there has been forward progress as has been testified to this morning. So today is the twelfth today is the thirteenth, sorry.

Right? Yes, sir. So

I'm gonna set the twenty seventh as the compliance date. That's February.

Okay.

Just in case. I don't I never wanna set these up for failure.

The reason why all that stuff was out there too was because he was working on the interior of his van.

Okay.

So And like I said, it's been since cleaned up.

Let's I guess, probably wanna go out and put your eyes on it and see what's left to do, but I'm gonna give you till May 27 to get this all buttoned up.

Okay.

After that, if it needs to be brought back for additional attention, the city can renotice it bring it back. But it sounds like you've already done a lot. Yes. There might be a few more things to do. I appreciate that you've already taken care of most of it. And so that that will be my order in this case. I I do find proper notice. I do find the property technically remains in violation even if you've taken care of

And the gas tank that's there, that was permitted.

I think officer Gomez said

The propane tank was fine.

Yes. That's okay. Right?

That's what

I thought I heard him say. Yeah. It's permanent. A problem. Yeah. Okay. And then May 27. Alright. Good luck, ma'am. Thank you very much. Appreciate you being here.

Thank you.

Number 18, code officer Herzog. Case number 26Dash04504. Respondent's Mary Clark. Respondent address is 2044 Southwest McAllister Lane.

And I'm sorry. Tell me which agenda item that was again.

Number 18. 18.

Thank you. Got it. Code officer Herzog and then sworn in. Good morning.

Good morning. This case concerns property at 2044 Southwest McAllister Lane, Portsmouth, Florida. On 03/24/2026, an inspection was done and photos taken showing the following violations. Section one fifty eight zero seven two b two multifamily living. Section forty one zero nine b, swimming pool, spas, and hot tubs unsecured pool. Section forty one zero eight e, exterior property areas and operating vehicles. Section one fifty eight dot two eleven, storage or accumulation of materials refuse and waste materials prohibited. Section forty one zero eight d, exterior property areas, unmaintained accessory structures. Section forty one zero eight a, exterior property areas, sidewalks, drainage. Section forty one zero eight g 2, exterior property areas, unmaintained right of way.

The photos depict an accurate representation of the property at the time the photos were taken. The notice of violation was issued on 04/17/2026. The respondent had until 04/22/2026 to bring the property into compliance. Compliance was not achieved by such date, and so a notice of hearing was furnished on 04/21/2026 by certified mail. On 04/30/2026, proper service was achieved by posting the property with a notice of hearing.

Three respondents failed to comply violation section forty one zero nine b, pool, spas, and hot tubs unsecured pool by 05/14/2026. The city requests the special magistrate authorize the city pursuant to section one sixty two zero eight five, the four statute, to answer upon the property to bring the property into compliance and specifically to abate the unsecured pool by securing with the pool cover, the cost of which will be charged to the respondent's at a later hearing. Additionally, the city requests that the respondents be ordered to comply with the cited provisions of the city of Port Simonsie code by 05/20/2026 for all other code violations listed above and have not in compliance by that date that any hearing be held to determine a fine to be imposed against the subject property. So the initial complaint for this property came from a police officer that stated there was a multifamily living occurring at this residence. They confirmed at least three unrelated gentlemen living inside of the home, so that's where that violation comes into play.

On my first inspection, I was able to run the tags of multiple cars that were parked there, and it came back to indeed three different individuals. So that's what that violation is for. The unsecured pool, as you can tell on this picture right here, the gate right here for the backyard is open. And then there is another picture. This is from the road behind the house.

There's a part of the fence in the back that's missing right here. And then as you can see, the screens are missing on the pull enclosure as well. The fence is also falling apart over right here and is not secured. For the inoperative vehicle, the tag on this vehicle right here, after running the tag, it does not belong to this vehicle or any vehicle. So this vehicle does not display proper registration.

The open storage are other items that are stored out here and as well along the side of the home right here. The unmaintained accessory structure is, again, how the fence is damaged and is missing pieces as well as the screen enclosure that is missing parts of the screen. The driveway is for the 4108A. As you can tell, it looks like the repairs have started with it, so they've been trying to work on it as it appears to get the driveway fixed up. And then for the Section forty one zero eight gs-two, the culvert pipe is blocked per our public works department. It needs to be cleaned out so it can properly convey water.

But city believes it can be unclogged Correct. As opposed to having to be replaced or Correct. Okay. Great. Is there a picture that shows the pool actually?

One second.

You can see just below that that's actually the waterline. It's a

Okay. Yeah. Got it. Thank you. Anything else from the city at this point? No, sir. Let me get you sworn in, and I'll be happy to

Please raise your right hand. Do you swear or affirm the testimony you offered today is the truth and nothing but the truth? Yes. And please state your name for the record.

Evening Patterson.

Thank you. Okay.

And how are you affiliated with the property?

I'm Mary's son. Okay. I'm here

for

That's fine. I have Mary Clark on my as the respondent. Okay. The floor is yours. If you have questions, you may ask them. If not, you can tell me about what's going on with the the case.

So with the driveway should be finished. I personally went over there and made sure that the person was working on it. Okay. The cars, the who's living there, he's gonna leave soon so that those two cars are gonna be gone. With the enclosure, I can personally do that myself.

I haven't been in the house for a while. As far as I know with the fence, I do know there was a fire. So I don't know what what she wants to do with that because I know it's not gonna be fairly cheap. But with the pool enclosure, I can probably figure that out. And when my mom discussed me about it, she just said she wanted extension for, the the stuff that was violated. But I know for sure that the driveway is gonna be done and then with the pool stuff, I don't think that's gonna be an issue. But with the cars, yeah, that that person's moving soon. So that will be gone.

Do you have a date for the car? Do you know when that

They said Like within this month. I don't really know. I don't really, know, know much, but I just I know he's leaving soon. So those cars are not gonna be there.

And is that the people who are living there that make this a violation of the multifamily living provision. So they're they're leaving and that that will cure that violation, I guess.

Well, yes, she had other tenants that damaged the property. So that's some that's why this kind of stuff going on there. But the individual with the cars, I don't know what he has going on, but I just know that he's leaving soon. Okay. So that that violation should be good. And then the driveway, I just dropped off some more concrete and they were working on it. So that should be finished. But the pool, I think that was just the biggest thing with the fence.

So so here's where I am with this. I mean, I'm reasonably comfortable giving you a little extra time on everything except the pool. I'm not giving you more time with that pool that don't unsecured swimming pools are a violation. I will not extend compliance time for. That needs to be the priority for this property to get that fixed then because

So would it just be the fencing or just the fence?

Well, there's multiple ways that you can secure the pool. I won't tell you which one to do.

For the record, fence is not permitted as a pool barrier. So the only way to get that into compliance would be to repair the screen enclosure. That is the permitted pool barrier.

Okay.

It it would it would probably help if the fence were also fixed so no one can enter the property, but the only permitted pool barrier is that enclosure.

So in terms of the code violation in order to secure the pool, you have to get the screen enclosure fixed according to what I'm hearing from mister Armstrong. And I suppose technically, alternatively, they could put a cover over the pool, I guess? Correct.

That would be also through a permitting process with the building department. So you could do one of two options. You could cover the pool. It wouldn't cure any other violation on the property but the secured pool. If you repair the screens, it would cure that violation plus secure the pool. So it depends on the option you wanna take.

Does the screen work require a permit, or can they just do that?

No. You can just repair the screens as as long as you're not making any structural changes and removing any of the beams or anything, you can just repair the screens and get that fixed.

So mean it sounds like the screen repair is the path of least resistance. You don't have to get a permit. You just have to that

Yeah. The the only I don't know if that door is supposed to be affixed to the screen enclosure somewhere on the other side. Oh, the need to be repaired if if that were the case as well.

Most of the stuff works. It's just this I think that that part in the screens, but I don't think that's gonna be an issue. We'll just have to see how much it is. But all the other stuff is being worked on. I'm doing that personally.

No. And I I appreciate that. So I mean but here's what's gonna happen with with pool, the unsecured pool. I'm gonna I will grant the relief requested by the city on that, which requires it to be in compliance tomorrow. And if it's not, I will authorize the city to abate that violation.

Now you need to stay in touch with officer Herzog or mister Armstro. I'm not sure who the point person is on this, but, you know, if you are actively working to get that fixed and we work with the city, I know there is a period of time that they can't just snap your fingers and it happens. They have to call a vendor and get on the schedule. I don't know the details, but I know there's always been there's been testimony in other cases like this in the past where the city has explained, there's it takes a few days just out of the the realities of life. So all that to say, you know, that gives you a little bit of time just to work on this, stay in touch with them, keep Citi informed of what you're doing.

And And by all means, correct me if I'm misstating anything. I want to put you at Citi in a position that you are not supposed to be in. So for everything else, I'm happy to give you a little bit more time. How much more time? You know?

I'd say like the end of the month. We're about two weeks or something. Because I I just I don't get paid until the end of the month and like the twenty first. And this is personally this is me out of pocket

Yeah.

Doing it for my mother because

So let me ask this. As presented was gonna be bifurcated, so how

We we can we can bifurcate the order. So we can do a compliance date for the pool and proceed forward with that, and then do a compliance date for all the other providers.

Does the city have any objection to a thirty day on everything but the pool? The pool, I'm doing

As long as the yeah. I I will work with the respondent.

No. The pool will be Yeah. As requested.

Yeah. For for the other time, we're not opposed to. Alright.

Yeah. I'm gonna give you thirty days for everything else. Okay. Anything else that you you need to or would like to tell me or put into the record? No? No. Anything else from the city? No, sir. Alright. Then in this case, I will find proper notice.

I will find the property remains in violation as cited. I find the violation of city code 4,109 b regarding the unsecured pool constitutes threat to the public health safety and welfare. For that violation 4,109 b, I will require compliance by May 14 if property is not if that violation is not in compliance by that date, city is authorized to enter the property abate and assess the costs. For all the other violations, we will set the compliance date. Looks like we're gonna call it June 12, which is Friday.

So stay in touch with the city. Keep them informed of your progress because they're gonna need to take a look at what you do in order to verify the compliance. And if this needs to be brought back for anything, re notice it and we'll see them. It looks like you've already been proactive and have been taking care of things. So that's always appreciated. Yes, get that pool taken care of. That needs to be the priority. All right. Thank you very much.

Number nine, code officer Huxtable. Case number 26Dash03966. Respondents Keith Arndell and Christine Arndell. Respondent address 332 Northwest Dorchester Street.

Good morning. Court officer Huxol have been previously sworn in. This case concerns a property at 332 Northwest Dorchester Street, Port St. Lucie, Florida on 03/16/2026. An inspection was done and photos taken showing the following violation, section one fifty eight point zero eight two, maximum occupancy for our residential district.

The photos depict an accurate representation of the property at the time the photos were taken. A notice of violation was issued on 03/16/2026. The respondents had until 03/26/2026, to bring the property into compliance. Compliance was not achieved by such date, so a notice of hearing was furnished on 03/23/2026, by certified mail. On 04/07/2026, proper service was achieved by certified mail, return receipt received.

The city request that the respondents be ordered to comply with the cited provisions of the city of Port St. Lucie Code by 05/20/2026. And if not in compliance by that date, then a hearing be held to determine the fine imposed against the subject property. This property was brought to you in March for multifamily living. We about two days later, I completed an inspection based on the respondent's testimony that everyone had vacated the property, and it was only rented to one individual.

Completed the walk through of the home. All common areas, bedrooms were cleared, showed no sign of multifamily. Final place that we had to check was the garage. Turns out there was somebody occupying that space with dogs in the garage. So this is what the garage looked like at the time of the inspection.

And then these are of the two this is a photo of it's a three bedroom, two bath. These are the two additional rooms. This is one of the rooms. This is the second room including the closet space showing no signs or evidence that there is anybody occupying that space. So the maximum occupancy, the violation would be because they're occupying the garage, the garage is basically not intended for someone to say so it would be considered a nonhabitable space.

Your honor, per the ordinance under subsection c, so one fifty eight zero eight two subsection c, it states that kitchens, bathrooms, living rooms, and nonhabitable spaces cannot be used as sleeping spaces.

Okay.

So and then for the purposes of this section, non nonhabitable spaces shall mean any room that does not meet the criteria for a lawfully established bedroom. So a a three two, the the garage is not considered a fourth bedroom.

Okay. And the code section that addresses that issues Okay. Specifically, sounds So was this May 13 that I see? Is that the date that I saw for the photograph?

March. The May 13 was I added that this morning just to show from the previous case that it was empty.

Okay. Alright. So that was

the Yeah. That was from the previous case showing evidence that we did check the two additional rooms, and they were empty.

Okay. So as we sit here today, you don't have any photograph of

No.

What the what

issue is?

No. Alright. Well, let me

is there is there anything else you need

to put into the

record of the moment?

Okay. Then let me get you sworn in, sir, and I'll be happy to hear from you.

Please raise your right hand. Do you swear or affirm the testimony you offer today is the truth and nothing but the truth? I do. And please state your name for the record.

Keith Arendelle.

Thank you.

Thank you, mister Arendelle. The floor is yours for questions or testimony.

Well, sir, I'm really dismayed because Ms. Huxtable right here, she came to say that there was a three bedroom, two bath house. It's a four bedroom, three bath house. Okay? And, okay, I've got two people in there with two dogs. Okay? I've got

a

GI, a retired guy that has some issues. Okay? He has the dogs in the garage. He has one of the rooms. Okay? Sometimes he goes in the garage and hangs out with the dog. Okay? But the room is occupied. That's his room. How could I be saying that I've got two people, two dogs or three dogs in the house, and it's and I have a problem. Okay? I mean, this this is not an HOA. Okay? I don't know what's going on here. The guy has some problems. He's the house is clean. Okay? He's living in a room. The the garage, he goes and hangs out with the dogs. Okay?

What am I supposed to do? Is is that a major issue? We can't afford to have a a guy that has some issues spending some time with his animals? I mean, that's crazy to me. I I don't see the I don't see the issue.

Oh, so the issue, as I understand it, is that the city's occupancy code, and I suspect, though I'm not a 100% sure the Florida building code, considers a garage as nonhabitable space, which means it can't be used as a bedroom. And the photograph that that I'm looking at here and and the other photographs that were shown and and your testimony seem to indicate that the garage is being used

Yes, sir. Sorry.

As a sleeping quarters for at least one person. So that is the issue. You can't garage is not habitable space under under those codes. It's not nobody's nobody's saying that the house isn't clean. No at this point, I don't think it's even an issue of too many people or too many dogs. It's just the fact that that you can't use the garage as a sleeping area. That's the issue.

That's that's been talked to, and that's done, sir.

I beg your pardon?

That is not taking place.

Alright.

I mean, was there a month ago, and she didn't even give me an opportunity to tell her come back and check it out. Okay? She she came. She had an attitude, and she left. Okay? The the the the house is taken care of. Sir There's nobody in the garage.

If if I may add, sir, when we originally did the inspection in March, I explained I contacted the respondent. I explained to him what the issue was, why we had to open a second case for this violation. He basically said that he wanted the same response that you're getting. I got the same response, and he stated that if we wanted to come to court, we could bring him here. This is why we're here.

I was never instructed that I could come by the property to do a second follow-up or a walk through. And then the tenant that is actually occupying the home at the time when I did the follow-up inspection following the March hearing, she stated that she's only paying rent for everything else in the main house, whatever is going on in the garage, has nothing to do with her. Plus, the occupant of the garage stated that that's where he stays with his pets. So we were never asked to come back to do any type of follow-up, not via email or additional phone calls.

Can you clarify your what you just said? You somebody told somebody test You just testified that somebody explained to you that they sleep in the garage with their pets. You elaborate on that

a little When I originally got there for the March hearing, for the March inspection, there was a tenant that was in the home, a female, who stated that she had just rented the property. She only occupies the additional bedroom, the the bedroom plus the living space that was all her. When I went, I told I explained to the tenant that I would need to check the garage. She stated that she would have to let the the gentleman know that I was coming in because he would have to remove the dogs from the space. I met with the person that was staying in that garage.

He confirmed to me that he was staying there. Building department was previously involved. He apparently, building department inspector spoke to him and stated as long as there's nothing constructed inside the actual garage, it's not considered converted. But I did speak with someone there, and he stated that he stayed in that garage.

Okay.

Mister Arendelle, do you have any questions based on the question that I just asked in

the answer? No, sir. No, sir.

Alright. So I have a question for you. I've heard everything that you've told me. So right now, I'm looking at a photograph of a garage that shows what appears to me to be a sleeping mattress with sheets and blankets, a box fan that is aimed towards the mattress, some fruit up on the shelf, some a water bottle and a lamp. So what am I tell me your testimony is that nobody's nobody uses the garage for sleeping quarters, then tell me what am I looking at here?

Well, sir, that was initially the plan. Okay? And the guy I told him that he couldn't do that. He had to move into the room. K. And said, the dogs are still in there. Okay? And he got the the petition for the dogs. But he he sleeps in the garage. I mean, he sleeps in the in the spare room in the back. I got four bedrooms. I mean, it's it's two people in there. And he he has he has his room. He has his bathroom, and he he goes down in the garage and hangs out with his dogs. But that's where he sleeps. And and that's that's it.

So is this the picture I'm looking at, is this the garage?

No. That's not a current picture, sir.

Okay. You Or the mat or the mattress is still there?

I'm not sure if the mattress is there, but the petition is definitely there because it doesn't want the dogs to come in. The mattress is supposed to be in the room that he is in.

Okay.

Your honor.

Yes,

sir. So regarding your testimony that this it's a it's a four bedroom home, four four bed, two bath. Correct? Three. It's three bedrooms now? Yes. Was this four.

You said four.

Is it four bedroom, three bath?

What is it? Is it a three bedroom or a four bedroom?

Four bedroom, three bath.

Would would this be one of the permitted bedrooms?

No, sir.

So on property appraiser, it's

Four bedroom, three bath.

It's a three-two. It's three bedroom, two bathroom.

No. It's a four bedroom, three bath.

The permitted structure was for a three bedroom,

Negative, negative, negative. It's always been that house was built in 1997, four bedroom, three bath.

Okay. So property appraiser records show one thing. Mister Arendelle is testifying to something different. Regardless, I'm looking at evidence of of a a garage that's being used as a bedroom, which is not allowed by code.

Okay.

Understand.

Pardon me? Understand. Okay. Anything else you need?

No, sir.

Okay. Anything else from the city?

Sent through.

Alright. So in this case, I will find proper notice. Mister Arundel is present at today's hearing. Based on the testimony that I have heard, I am gonna make a finding of violation. There's been the photographic evidence is is very clear to me that that this is a garage being used as sleeping quarters.

Know, mister Arndell, your your very own testimony kinda went back and forth. Murphy testified he was sleeping there, then testified he used to sleep there. And so what I will require is evidence that that is no longer a set up as a sleeping area for for people. That that's not that's what's not allowed. Now your last testimony was that, in fact, the gentleman is now sleeping in the bedroom.

Apparently, would be okay. But I'm going to grant the relief requested by the city, which requires compliance by May 20. I mean, this isn't a situation where permits have to be obtained. The garage just has to be dismantled from being usable as sleeping area. And the city will need to have an opportunity to inspect that in order to comply the case out.

And if that doesn't happen by May 20, then the city can re notice this for further proceedings, whether that's certification of fine or whatever it may be. But hopefully, this will get taken care of by May 20. Alright. And I will sign that order. Thank you, sir. I appreciate you being here.

Okay. Thank you, sir.

Number five, code officer Diaz. Case number 26Dash01936. Respondent's Lake Worth Property Enterprises LLC. Respondent address is 1795 Northwest Saint Lucie West Boulevard.

Good morning. Good morning. Court officer Diaz, previously sworn. This case concerns the property at 1795 Northwest Saint Lucie West Boulevard in Port Saint Lucie, Florida. On 02/08/2026, an inspection was done and photos taken showing the following violations.

Section 41.1 b, exterior structure, exterior structure in need of maintenance, 41.08 D, exterior property areas, unmaintained accessory structures, and section 154.03 C1C, general landscaping requirements. The photos depict an accurate representation of the property at the time the photos were taken. A notice of violation was issued on 02/11/2026. The respondent had until 03/16/2026, to bring the property into compliance. Compliance was not achieved by such date, and so a notice of hearing was furnished on 04/02/2026, by certified mail.

On 04/08/2026, proper service was achieved by certified mail, return receipt received. The city requests that the respondent's Lake Worth Property Enterprises, LLC, be ordered to comply with the citing provisions of the City Of Port St. Lucie Code by 05/20/2026, and if not in compliance by that date, then a hearing to be held to determine a fine to be imposed against the subject property. And a little background. I just made contact with the representatives of the property, I believe, early last week, and we just started discussing some of the violations today at the hearing or prior to the hearing.

As you can see here, this is part of the exterior structure that's in need of maintenance. I believe this is the soffit area that is falling apart. Just some minor staining along the exterior of the wall here. The dumpster corral as well has some stains and discoloration. This is a wide view of the missing continuous hedging that's supposed to be around this area, and there's a few pine trees that are also missing here.

More photos of just some missing landscaping, just gaps in this hedge right here. This is one of the gas pump islands that was recently struck by a car. But after speaking with Mr. Moore, he did show me some photos a little while ago, and they just started repairing this this week. Another view of some missing landscaping.

And then this is the landscaping site plan just showing where the hedging and the trees should be. And that's all I have.

Okay. Alright. Thank you. Thank you. Can I get your sworn in, sir, and I'll be happy to hear from you?

Please raise your right hand. Do you swear or affirm the testimony you offer today is the truth and nothing but the truth?

I do.

And please state your name for the record.

Brad Moore.

Thank you.

Thank you, Mr. Moore. If you have any questions, you may ask otherwise. The floor is yours.

The only thing that I would like to request is an extension. I'm not disagreeing with any of the violations. Just a little bit of insight for you. We do have the site is being prepared to be remodeled. I have a design plan that we're going to be opening up.

We have to go through architect and engineering right now. And then we'll be submitting to planning and zoning to have it approved to have the entire inside of the store redone that we've done similar stores in the town here. And then when we do those remodels, we always open it up to make the exterior property look just as good as the inside of the property. With that being said, we have an open work order for the soffit to be repaired already. I'm waiting on our contractor to come out and do it.

We're not going to negotiate the price or anything. We'll just have it fixed. The pressure washing that is requested for the back of the store and the dumpster corral has already been dispatched for service. That'll be handled by the end of the week, at the end of this week. And then the landscaping concerns, the only reason I haven't brought that into compliance as of now is because of all the construction on the Peacock St.

Lucie West Turn. We have the construction company is driving through our preserve in the front of our property. They have hit the main waterline going into our sprinkler system on the reclaimed. They have fixed it. I'm not here to they've done a really good job at it.

But there's mistakes that always happen. So I was hoping to have the Peacock St. Lucie West construction done, then go back in and redo the entire landscaping. I understand that timelines are different. So if I need to, I'm happy to go ahead and fix the landscape and I just request more time.

Okay. Does the renovation work that you're going to be submitting for proposed to change the required landscaping on the current site plan?

No, it wouldn't. We would take it back to the original site plan most likely.

Okay. So that's not an issue. The issue would really be the construction traffic coming and going. Do you have a sense for how much time that you're asking for on that?

I'd like ninety days. I'll go ahead and fix because the landscaping that Inspector Diaz is referring to is on the South West Corner of the property where the construction is on the Northwest corner of the property. So I don't mind bringing that into compliance.

Just

hopefully my irrigation doesn't get hit again.

For your site plan for the interior remodel, do you know when you are going to submit those plans to the planning and zoning department?

So our goal is to start construction in September, October for that way we're done before the Mets come back to town. So right now, the plans are in our architect and engineering firms' hands. I'm hoping to submit within the next to be on time, we would have to be submitting probably in the next sixty days.

So for that, Your Honor, I think to not set everything up for failure, I think we're comfortable with one hundred and twenty days. So that would allow them enough time to submit and we can verify with infusion for the planning and zoning department. There is extensive construction in that area in general. And then depending on what that interior remodel do you know when the remodel ideally once the plans are submitted, how long that process would take?

The remodel takes about eight weeks.

Okay. Because they might have to utilize sections just to store during that remodel. So I don't want them to put in landscaping that might eventually get damaged in the process.

Yes. No, I agree. That doesn't make sense.

Yes. Figured if they're going to go through this process, we can give them enough time and to verify that plans are submitted with planning and zoning. And as long as that happens, we can work with you in terms of a timeframe moving forward in case there's a hiccup or anything like that.

Okay. Sounds good to me.

So if we set compliance date for that would be, like, mid September. Like, September 18?

That sounds good.

That sound so that that makes sense to me as well. Alright. Mister Moore, anything else you needed to put into the record or that you wanna tell me before I enter that order?

No, sir.

No. Anything else from the city? No. Alright. Then in this case, I will find proper notice. I will find the property remains in violation as cited based on the evidence and the testimony I've reviewed, and we will set the compliance date 09/18/2026. And then if this needs to come back for anything or any reason, the city can renotice it, and we'll see you then. But it sounds like that should be enough time.

Okay.

So good luck. Thank you.

Thank you.

Thank you.

Number 19, code officer Huxtable. Case number 26Dash02883. Respondents, Lucia Victoria Silva Esposito and Victor Jesus Silva Esposito. Respondent address is 634 Southwest Bowling Court.

Officer Huxaba previous this morning. This case concerns the property at 634 Southwest Bowling Court, Port St. Lucie, Florida on 02/25/2025. An inspection was done and photos taken showing the following violation. Section 73.03, resident prohibited use as living in an RV, section 158.07 two (two) multifamily living, section 158.08 maximum occupancy for all residential districts.

The photos depict an accurate representation of the property at the time the photos were taken. A notice of violation was issued on 02/26/2026. The respondents had until 03/08/2026, to bring the property into compliance. Compliance was not achieved by such date, so a notice of hearing was furnished on 03/11/2026, by certified mail. On 04/28/2026, proper service was achieved by posting the property with a notice of hearing.

The city requests that the respondents be ordered to comply with the cited provisions of the city of Port St. Lucie Court by 05/31/2026. If not in compliance by that date, then a hearing be held to determine the fines to be imposed against the subject property. This was when the property was posted. Front view of the home.

This is the RV. There it look it appears that there is some type of connection with a propane tank attached to the RV there. There's a step on this side that's out. Blinds in the garage. If you look by the open areas right there.

If you look at the side, there's an AC unit that's attached to the side of the garage that looks like it's connected to that wall right there. This is a closer view of that. Alright. So, originally, when we did the inspection, we went out there for commercial vehicle parking. That's when we found that there is about eight persons possibly occupying the home.

Two, I think their husband and wife, they're occupying the RV. And then the property owner itself is staying inside of the home with his wife and son. And in the garage, there's another person that was occupying the garage with his wife. The the owner of the home could not confirm whether or not the wife was staying there. And then we there was a vehicle that was at the property when we ran the tag, it came back to another individual that the owner claimed that that person does live there.

The vehicle is just being stored there. So that's where the multifamily came in. And then for the maximum occupancy, the individual that is supposedly occupying the garage with his wife, that's where he's staying. Okay.

Okay.

Anything else you need to put into the record before I

I know the owner is trying to get everything sorted out. He did make contact last week since our initial conversation regarding the violations. He's looking to have the RV removed. He stated that the individual in the garage has since moved out. So right now, we're Canada's trying to see if we can do a on-site visit to do some walk through, take some photos, confirm things are cleared up. They had requested that they wanted a compliance date for the thirty first, so which we had approved, but we wanted everything to go on record.

Okay. Great. Let me get you sworn in, sir, and then I'll be happy to hear from you.

Please raise your right hand. Do you swear or affirm the testimony you offer today is the truth and nothing but the truth?

Yes.

And please state your name

for

the

record. Yes,

sir. Don't have anything. I agree with her in regards to the extension, May 31. And after that everything should be good.

Sounds like you're working towards getting

Yes, yes. The RV is being moved out. I'm just looking for a location for it. I was thinking about selling it, but I have family there. We're looking for a place for it.

All right. So the request is compliance date for the end of May, and the city has no objection to that. Everybody other than that, everybody's in agreement with act compliance date. Okay. Then if there's nothing else, I'll go ahead and find proper notice in this case.

I will find based on the evidence property remained in remains in violation as cited in May 30 just to make sure that's not like a Sunday or something. May 31 is a Sunday. So do you wanna do May 29 or June 1?

Let's do June 1.

June 1. We'll we'll set the compliance date for June 1 in this case. And if it needs to be brought back, Citi can renotice it for further proceedings. Alright. Good luck, sir. Thank you for being here.

Thank Appreciate it.

Thank you. Good luck. There

are no more parties present to be heard. We'll now move on to the violation hearing section of special requests. Number 15, code officer Gomez. Case number 26Dash03299. Respondent address is 1837 Southeast Boleto Street.

Good morning.

This case concerns the property at 1837 Southeast Boleto Street, Port Saint Lucie, Florida. On 03/04/2026, an inspection was done and photos taken showing the following violations. Section 41.08 bravo, exterior property areas, high grass and weeds over 12 inches. Section one fifty four point zero five Charlie responsibility overgrowth, and section 41.08 echo, exterior property areas and operative vehicles. The photos depict an accurate representation of the property at the time the photos were taken.

Notice of violation was issued on 03/04/2026. Respondent had until 03/14/2026, to bring the property into compliance. Compliance was not achieved by such date, and so a notice of hearing was furnished on 04/21/2026 by a certified male. On 04/29/2026, proper service was achieved by posting the property with a notice of hearing. The recommendation is as follows.

The respondent, Marcel Landry, be ordered to comply with the cider provisions of the city by 05/20/2026, and if not in compliance by that date, then a hearing be held to determine a fine to be imposed against the subject property. In addition, if the respondent fails to comply by May 2026, the city requests special magistrate authorize the city pursuant to section 162.08 subsection five of Florida statute to enter upon the property, bring the property into compliance, specifically to cut and maintain the high grass and weeds and to cut and remove the overgrowth of landscaping, the cost of which will be charged to respondent at a later hearing. This is the day of the posting, And this is the overgrowth here all all down the side. There's a lot of it in the in the back, in the front, and then the grass. This one of the neighbors cut the city right of way area and but this area up here is what we're concerned about.

More of the overgrowth and grass. This is around the mailbox. It's almost hidden. This is the in op vehicle. We're not asking for anything anything to do with that. Just the overgrowth in grass. More the grasshoes, more of the overgrowth here and on the side here and from this side. And that's that's it, sir.

Okay.

And there's been no contact with this resident. Neighbors said that they came and gone, and that was

it. Okay. Is there anybody here on behalf of the respondent? Respondent is not present. However, the city has proper notice with the notice documents contained in the file.

Based on the testimony and the evidence, I will find the property remains in violation as cited. I will find that the violations are of city codes forty one zero eight b and one fifty four zero five c, which are regarding the high grass and weeds and the overgrowth constitute threats to the public health safety and welfare. I will grant all the relief requested by the city, including May 20 compliance date. And, after that, if property remains in violation, authority to enter the property, abate the violation the health safety welfare violations and assess those costs.

Number 16, code officer Gomez. Case number 26Dash03604. Respondent address is 2322 Southeast Maslin Avenue.

This case concerns the property at 2322 Southeast Maslin Avenue, Port St. Lucie, Florida. On 03/16/2026, an inspection was done and photos taken to show on the following violation. Section 41.08 bravo exterior property areas, high grass and weeds over 12. The photos depict an accurate representation of the property at the time the photos were taken. Notice of violation was issued on 03/16/2026. The respondent had until 03/26/2026, to bring the property into compliance. Compliance was not achieved by such date, so a notice of hearing was furnished on 04/21/2026, certified mail. On 04/29/2026, proper service was achieved by posting the property with a notice of hearing. Recommendation is as follows.

City requests the respondents be ordered to comply with the site provisions of the city of Fort St. Lucie code by May 2026 and if not in compliance by that date, then a hearing be held to determine the fine to be imposed against the subject property. In addition to the response, failed to comply by 05/20/2026. The city requested a special magistrate authorize the city pursuant to section 162.08 subsection five of Florida statute to inter pronged property to bring the property into compliance and specifically to cut and maintain the high grass and weeds, cost of which will be charged for respondents at a later hearing. Day of the posting, and this is on May 6 as it stands.

Just a photo of some of the grass out in the swell area in front and to the side and more towards the rear of the property.

Okay. Alright. Is there anybody here on behalf of the respondent? The respondent is not present, but the city has proper notice with the notice documents contained in the file. Based on the evidence, I will find the property remains in violation as cited and that the violation constitutes threat to the public health, safety and welfare. I'll grant all the relief requested by the city, including a May 20 compliance date. And after that, authority, to enter the property, abate, the violation, and assess the costs.

Number 17, code officer Gomez. Case number 26Dash04593. Respondent address is 1791 Southeast Ridgewood Street.

This case concerns the property at 1791 Southeast Ridgewood Ridgewood Street, Port Saint Lucie, Florida. On 03/24/2026, an inspection was done and photos taken showing the fall in violation. Section 41.08 bravo, exterior property areas, high grass and weeds over 12 inches. Photos depict an accurate representation of the property at the time the photos were taken. Notice the violation was issued on 03/24/2026.

Respondent had until 03/31/2026, to bring the property into compliance. Compliance was not achieved by such date, so a notice of hearing was furnished on 04/21/2026, by a certified male. On 04/29/2026, proper service was achieved by posting the property with notice of hearing. Recommendation is as follows. The city requests that respondent Patrick Richardson be ordered to comply with the site provisions of the city of Port St.

Lucie code by 05/20/2026 and if not in compliance by that date, then a hearing be held to determine a fine to be imposed against the subject property. In addition, if the respondent fails to comply by 05/20/2026, the city requests the special magistrate authorize the city pursuant to section one c 2.08 subsection five Florida statute to enter upon the property to bring the property into compliance and specifically to cut and maintain the high grass and weeds cost of which will be charged to respondent at a later hearing. This is the day of the posting. This is the high grass and weeds area, and it's it's throughout the yard over 12 inches. Front view, right side view, and just more of the right side view and more towards the back.

That's it, sir.

Okay. Is there anybody here on behalf of the respondent? Respondent is not present, but the city has proper notice with the notice documents contained in the file. Based on the testimony and the evidence, I find property remains in violation as cited. I find that the violation constitutes threat to the public health, safety and welfare, and we'll grant all the relief requested by the city, including a May 20 compliance date, and after that authority to enter the property, abate the violation, and assess the costs. Thank you, sir.

Number 20, code officer Mendoza. Case number 26Dash05794. Respondent address is 2241 Southeast Manor Avenue.

Good morning, your honor. Good morning. This case concerns a property at, 2241 Southeast Manor Ave, Port St. Lucie, Florida on 04/11/2026. An inspection was done.

The photos taken showing the following violations. 4108 exterior property has high grass and weeds over 12 inches. The photos depict an accurate representation of the property at the time the photos was taken. A violation notice of violation was issued on 04/11/2026. The respondent had until 04/17/2026, to bring the property into compliance. Compliance was not achieved by such date, and so a notice of hearing was furnished on 04/21/2026 by a certified male. On 04/30/2026, proper service was achieved by posting a property with a notice of hearing. The city requested the respondents be ordered to comply with the site of provision of the city of Port St. Lucie code by 05/20/2026. And if not, it complies by that date, and a hearing be held to determine a fine being posed against the subject property.

In addition, if the respondents fails to comply by 05/20/2026, the city request that the special magistrate authorize the city pursuant to section one sixty two zero eight five Florida statue to enter upon the property to bring the property into compliance and specifically to cut and maintain the high grass and weeds, the cost which will be charged to the respondent at a later hearing. Here's the posting. It's property is vacant. I tried to look for a sign. It looks like the realtors haven't been by in a long time, so there's nowhere to contact anybody.

So around the property in the front, as you can see, mailbox there. The grass keeps growing higher and higher. That's what I have, sir.

Okay. Is there anybody here on behalf of the respondent? Respondent is not present. However, the city has proper notice with the notice documents contained in the file. Based on the testimony and the evidence, I will find property remains in violation as cited. Find that violation constitutes threat to the public health, safety, and welfare. I will grant all the relief requested by the city, including May 20 compliance date. And after that, authority to enter the property and make the violation and assess the cost.

Thank you, sir.

Thank you, sir.

Number 21, code officer Pico. Case number 26Dash05159. Respondent address is 332 Southeast Majestic Terrace.

Good morning. Code officer Pico previously sworn in. This case concerns the property at 332 Southeast Majestic Terrace, Port St. Lucie, Florida. On 04/02/2026, an inspection was done and photos taken showing the following violations. Section 41 o eight b exterior property areas, high grassed weeds over 12 inches. Photos depict an accurate representation of the property at the time the photos were taken. A notice violation was issued on 04/02/2026. The respondent had until 04/07/2026 to bring the property into compliance. Compliance was not achieved by such date until a notice of hearing was furnished on 04/21/2026 by proper by certified mail.

On 04/30/2026, proper service was achieved by posting the property with a notice of hearing. The respondent the city request that the respondents be ordered to comply with the cited provisions of the city of Port St. Lucie code by 05/20/2026. And if not in compliance by that date, then a hearing be held to determine a fine to be imposed against the subject property. In addition, if the respondents fail to comply by 05/20/2026, the city requests a special magistrate authorize the city pursuant of section 162.085 photo statute to enter upon the property to bring the property into compliance and specifically to cut and maintain the high grass and weeds, the cost of which will be charged to respondent at a later hearing.

The front of the property on the left side. And as you could see, it's pretty high in the back as well. The measurement and the posting.

K.

Respondent is not present. However, the city has proper notice with the notice documents contained in the file. Based on the evidence, I will find the property remains in violation as cited and that the violation constitutes threat to the public health, safety and welfare. I will grant all the relief requested by the city, including a May 20 compliance date and authority after that to enter the property, abate the violation and assess the cost.

Thank you, sir.

Number 22, code officer Williams. Case number 26Dash02471. Respondent address is 0 Southwest Biltmore Street. The parcel ID is 3420Dash560Dash2256Dash000Dash3. We are waiting for it to be officially assigned an address.

Y'all.

At that.

I'm Warren Williams. I've been previously sworn. This case concerns a property at 0 Southwest Biltmore Street, parcel ID 34205602256003 Port St. Lucie, Florida. On 02/13/2026, an inspection was done and photos taken showing the following violations: Section 158.211, storage or accumulation of materials, refuse and waste materials prohibited Section 154.05C, Responsibility for Overgrowth and Section 4108D, Exterior Property Areas, Unmaintained Accessory Structures.

Photos depict an accurate representation of the property at the time the photos were taken. A notice of violation was issued on 02/17/2026. Respondent had until 03/22/2026 to bring the property into compliance. Compliance was not achieved by such date, so a notice of hearing was furnished on 04/02/2026 by certified mail. On 04/30/2026, proper service was achieved by posting the property with a notice of hearing.

The city requested that the respondent, Raven Park Maintenance Association, be ordered to comply with the cited provisions of the City Of Port St. Lucie Code by 05/20/2026, And if not in compliance by that date, then a hearing be held to determine a fine be imposed against the subject property. In addition, if the respondent failed to comply by 05/20/2026, city requests special magistrate authorize the city pursuant to Section 162.08 subsection five of the Florida Statutes to enter upon the property and bring the property into compliance and specifically to remove all open storage or accumulation of materials, refuse and waste materials prohibited from the property and to cut and remove all overgrowth of landscaping from the property cost of which will be charged to the respondent at a later hearing. This is a retention area in the 1600 Block of Southwest Biltmore, Your Honor. It has a chain link fence across the front of it here that has since been damaged.

There's overgrowth coming through the fence here where I'm pointing with you right now. And this is all illegally left in the city right of way, all of this waste here. And the fence obviously has been broken due to this issue. This would actually pose a health and safety risk obviously with reptiles and ferment with all of that garbage and yard waste being left there. So we're asking permission to remove that at the property owner's expense.

And this overgrowth that need cut back, this is encroaching significantly into the emergency pull off area that is city owned right of way and we like to cut that back behind the fence. And that is all.

Go back a couple of pictures. So the property in violation is on the opposite side of the fence from where the truck is parked? And then that stuff's

pouring over? As you're looking at this picture, your honor, the area to the right behind, that's behind the fence. That's the drainage area there. Area to the left where the truck is, that's sitting right of way outside of the fence.

And all that vegetation is

built in of the truck there.

So this is an unusual property when this is in the industrial area within the city of Port St. Lucie. So when this entire there are several parcels connected or associated to this property. So you had two plazas built with four buildings in total and this was their drainage retention area between these two plazas.

Okay.

And each plaza was parceled and sold off separately And the original owner maintained control of this retention area, and they've not maintained it the entirety of this time.

Okay.

So it's it's why they didn't parcel it with someone, don't know. Okay.

Yeah. Thank

you for that.

Alright. What he said, your honor.

Got it. Thank you. Anything else you need to put into the record? That answered my question.

No, sir.

Okay. The respondent is not present, but the city has proper notice with the notice documents in the file. Based on the testimony and the evidence, I will find the property remains in violation as cited. We're gonna say we're gonna call, I guess it's 150 one-two eleven and one hundred fifty four-five C and it's the health safety welfare violations. That's the accumulation and the overgrowth.

And those constitute a threat to public health, safety and welfare. But I do find property remains in violation as cited. I'll grant all the relief requested by the city, including May 20 compliance date. And after that, authority to enter the property abate the safety welfare violations, and assess the costs.

Thank you, your honor. Yeah.

We've now completed all cases with special requests. I can go ahead and put on record, how we noticed all the alleged violators who were not present.

Yes, please.

A notice of hearing or a notice of the certification of fine was sent to the violator by certified mail return receipt requested to the address listed in the tax collector's office for tax notices or to the address listed in the the county property appraiser's database. If the green card is returned, it was placed in the file, and it's either signed, unsigned, or unclaimed. Ten days before the hearing, the agenda was posted on the bulletin board in the lobby of Port St. Lucie City Hall. Also, a notice of hearing was posted on the property in question along with an affidavit of posting, which included a copy of the notice posted in the date and places of its posting.

If the certification card was not returned to the neighborhood services department, then within ten days before the hearing, posting is completed in the same manner as if the card was returned unclaimed as stated above. The photos shown at today's hearing are kept and maintained as public records of the city of Port St. Lucie's neighborhood services department.

Regarding the following cases entered into public record, our code compliance officers inspected the property and found the violations to exist. A reasonable date for compliance was subsequently given, but upon reinspection, it was confirmed that compliance was not achieved. A formal notice of hearing was issued for today's hearing, and the respondent has failed to appear. The city requests that these cases be found in violation of their respective listed code sections and be given until 05/20/2026 to bring the property into compliance. Should compliance not be met, the city requests that a future hearing be scheduled to determine and impose an appropriate fine.

Number six, case number 26Dash01904. Respondent address is 3851 Southwest Port Saint Lucie Boulevard. Number seven, case number 26Dash02412. Respondent address is 2130 Southwest Hayworth Avenue. Number 10, case number 25Dash12923. Responding address is 1761 Southwest Cycle Street. Number 11, case number 25Dash17845. Responding address is 601 Southwest Sandbar Terrace. Number 12. Case number 25Dash02978.

Responding address is 166 Southwest Port Saint Lucie Boulevard. Number 13, case number 26Dash02627. Respondent address is 934 Southwest Biltmore Street. And number 14, case number 26Dash04509. Respondent address is 1126 Southeast McFarlane Avenue.

Regarding the following cases entered into public record, a violation a violation hearing was held, and a date of compliance was issued by the special magistrate. Upon reinspection by a code compliance officer, it was determined that compliance has not been achieved for the violations of the respective listed sections of the code. A formal notice of hearing was issued for today's hearing, and the respondent has failed to appear. The city requested these fines be certified and administrative costs be assessed and awarded to the city.

Number 23, case number 25Dash13936. Respondent address is 1225 Southeast Port St. Lucie Boulevard. Number 24. Case number 25Dash18159. Respondent address is 149 Northwest Bay Shore Boulevard, Number 25. Case number 25Dash11318. Respondent address is 189 Southwest Dalton Circle. And number 26, case number 25Dash11440. Respondent address is 1012 Southwest Jacqueline Avenue.

Alright. Thank you. I will sign the appropriate orders for those matters. Let's see what's left. Is there any public comment? Seeing none. We've concluded our business. Is there anything else for the good of the order before we call it today? No, sir. Having concluded our business at 10:33AM, we are adjourned.