Code Enforcement Board - Special Meeting

Our special magistrate.

Okay. Good morning, everyone. I wanna call the January 8 special magistrate hearing to order. The first matter on the list is CEBD 20 4259 Arthur j McCaffrey. And has anyone signed up to speak for these cases? I know there's two of them.

I believe mister McCaffrey is here signing

up as McCaffrey. Okay. We can wait till he's finished. And,

your honor, just for some housekeeping, our PowerPoint presentation has it distinct distinguishes seven seventeen and seven thirteen.

Okay.

But it's all in one. We'll be entering the since we have two separate cases two separate records, I'll be putting the PowerPoint into both cases. But when we are specifically talking about one case, we'll only reference the pictures and any of the information for 07/30 and July. Alright.

So I'll open the hearing and ask the city to present its case.

Thank you, your honor.

Good morning, sir. Good morning. Our community resource officer and certified court enforcement officer, Wilburna Acosta, will be presenting case number CEBD2400259First. The address is located at 713 Groveland Avenue. The zoning for the area is residential single family.

On July 23, an inspection was conducted by myself of the address following a complaint by the Venice Police Department's detective unit. The property was observed the following violations, offensive accumulation on a property, and zoning district violation of the property for property maintenance. The violation of Chapter 34, Division two, Section 30 four-eighty one, offensive accumulation prohibited, exceptions of the City Of Venice Code of Ordinance, and Chapter 88, Building Regulation Section three, property maintenance. Maintenance. During the investigation of the inspection of the property, shows that the property, to be, overgrown, with grass, a dilapidated, rear garage on the property with open holes in the roof, wood rot, and no longer being supported by the actual frame of the structure, on the property, which may fail or collapse.

On August 27, the city, Venice building official conducted a visual inspection of the structure and deemed them as unsafe as an unsafe building and posted the properties as such. The owner has been aware of the violation since 2013 as I discovered that the property has had violations for many of the same violations starting in 2013, at least twice that year and then again in 2016, 2021, 2023, and 2024 with this current case. I took photographs of the property on '24, '24, '24, 12/1124, and 01/06/2025. These photos fairly and accurately represent the conditions I observe and would like to offer these photographs and documents into evidence as City Composite exhibit number one. I would like to show you the slideshow there, sir.

Okay. As you see, they are both listed as 07/2017, but we will separate them.

Has mister McCaffrey seen these photographs?

No, sir. As you see, the original photograph is from the driveway to the rear garage. As you see, it is leaning. The bottom has all wood rot. This is when we came back, and mister McCaffrey was with us.

He allowed us onto the property. I took pictures of 713 on the left. And as you see that the actual beam is bowed, and and they are using wood that is not generated to hold that weight, to hold the structure up. And you can see daylight from the actual wall and greenery vegetation growing through the wall that's supposed to hold up that section. This is the outside of the garage.

Again, holes in the roof allowing water, a lot of wood rot. That would be the west side wall facing, the west or east east sidewall. Correct? And that is the picture I took just recently from the driveway again after double hurricanes back to back. The lean is worse.

The fascia on the front is now falling off the face of the drive of garage in the rear. So the condition of the property is much worse. This is the front yard of 713 now currently as of the sixth. As you see, it's overgrown. And that would be the end of that slideshow for 713.

Okay. And I will admit those photographs and evidence. Anything further? Further?

That's it, sir. On my behalf. I

have a few follow-up questions. Okay. Officer, did you have contact with the owner in this matter? Yes. Okay. Were you able to communicate with the owner in matter?

Yes. Who is the owner? Arthur McCaffrey.

Okay. And when did you speak with him about it?

I spoke to him, and I don't I don't know if I have specific dates. All the communications have been sent by certified mail to the listed owner with some phone calls and text messages.

Have you had an opportunity to explain the violations to mister McCaffrey?

Yes, sir.

Let's see here. Have in the property is still in disrepair?

Yes, sir. And

on you said you went to you made your initial investigation on 07/23/2024. Correct?

Correct.

Okay. And those pictures that you took on 07/23, those where did you take those pictures from?

The driveway leading up to the front door.

Were you in the public right of way?

Yes,

sir. Were you able to see the see the structure from the public right of way and take those pictures?

Yes, sir.

Okay. And you also went back on 08/26/2024?

Correct. I went back 08/27/2024 with the the building building official for an official inspection of the property with mister McAfee, the owner.

Okay. And did you have permission to go into the property at that on that date?

Yes, sir.

And is that when you took the pictures involving showing the holes in the roof? Correct.

The interior of the structure as compared to just the outside photographs. Okay.

You explained to mister McCaffrey on how how to correct this how to correct these violations?

Correct. I have and so has the building official.

Okay. Again, it's currently not still in disrepair? Correct. Okay. Nothing further at this time, your honor.

I just have a few questions. Have there been any efforts to remedy the violations?

I I don't believe so, sir.

And what is it the city asking for?

The conditions of the of the structures are in in such disrepair that he had two options. Either was to actually repair actual structures or dismantle them, demo them.

So again, what is the city asking for?

To either repair or demolish properties.

Mr. McCaffrey, you have the right to ask Officer Acosta any questions should you choose to do so. You'll have an opportunity to present your case yourself. But do you have any questions for Officer Acosta?

Well, my first question

Hold on, sir. Since this is being recorded, please come and speak into the microphone.

State your name first before you do so before you ask your question.

Go ahead.

What do I call you?

State your name.

Your honor.

That's fine.

Okay. My name is Arthur McCaffrey.

And do you have a question for officer Acosta?

Well, my first question is, is this my appeal case? Hearing anything?

This is your hearing, not appeal.

But I filed for an appeal.

All right. This hearing is an opportunity for both the city and you to present evidence to determine whether or not there's reason to believe that there's been a violation of the city ordinances. If there has been, then I'll enter a ruling that there's been a violation. I'll give you an opportunity to correct the violation. And if you don't do that within a certain period of time, then you could be fined. Once I issue that order, if you're not satisfied with it, you would have the right to file an appeal.

Okay. I thought today was my appeal hearing, and I have an attorney. And this is the email chain to the attorney back and forth. And they first of all, I received the latest certified mail attorney on December 19. And but because of the holidays, it took ten days for them to reply to me because they asked me to scan and send PDF files of everything I had, which I did, and all descriptions, which I did.

And then I emailed them after Christmas, and and I asked them, what's the status? It's been I I I said, I understand the holidays and stuff. And they wrote back to me and said that they are too busy to be able to attend a January 8 hearing. And so I requested a postponement of this hearing. They I was told that they were gonna call me. No one called me. And I have lots of evidence here, but I have an attorney. And I want to be represented by an attorney.

What's the city's position?

Your honor, this is not the appeal of a building of a, let's say, structured version.

Sorry. You're right. I'll take it. Your

honor. Testing? Mehta, are we okay? Yes. Okay. Your honor, just to clarify, if Mr. McCaffrey has confusion, this is not an appeal structure from the building official. This is the code enforcement case. So this is essentially an original action, not an appeal under the city code. This is for code enforcement regarding the garage in the backyard of the property.

Now

in the notice we say if you're going to have an attorney to have them notify us and file a notice of appearance.

That's going to be my next question.

And at this time I have not seen a notice appearance that has been filed with either the city or brought into the record. Usually, so therefore, city wants to request that we we move forward with it.

Mister McCaffrey, as counsel for the city has indicated, if an attorney is going to get involved, they'll usually send a letter or an email or something notifying that they are going to be representing you since that hasn't occurred in this case where you've received notice, we're here and prepared to proceed today. So whatever evidence you have to present on your behalf, you have an opportunity right now to present that evidence.

So I'm going to be my own attorney.

Very rarely do people come in to these types of hearings with an attorney.

Well, this is a total false. He's

Well, tell me what he's lying about.

Well, first of all, I'm curious. When what are you talking about? What was it? 2,006, 2011, 2013, these dates? What what are you referring to? Because there was nothing wrong with the garage at

that time.

So in the research of the property, we I had come across multiple other code enforcement officers who have gone to the property, who have complained who have received complaints about the property and the rear garage. We also had pictures back on I believe I gave it to mister Lewis, pictures of the property going back. I think it might be 2022 with the same damage on the property.

That's when it started, Hurricane Ian. It was fine before that.

Well, and frankly, the history that's been provided is helpful to me. But it's really not going to affect my determination today. We're here to deal with today's situation. So why don't you address what officer Acosta has presented going back to, I believe, July 2024.

Okay. Well, the letter says that the on-site inspection, not a curbside inspection, was performed. Me and my entire family were not at that house from January 21 to '20 to thirty first. And my tenants next door at the 717 House said that they I asked them, have you seen anyone? My when I got home on June July 31, my door back door was wide open, unlocked, and not closed.

January 31 of what year?

This year.

It's only January 8.

I'm sorry. July is what I meant. And but yet the the original certified letter says that they did an on-site inspection, which is false. This attorney probably didn't contact you because it was at the last minute, and they said, you can call Florida Bar for another referral as we really are too busy right now. And I had already I mean, the the process from the original letters that I got in August, September, or whatever, it didn't say anything about you're gonna have a hearing first, and then you can appeal.

It didn't talk about that. I submitted all the documentation for an appeal. And in fact, mister Acosta said that he was going to get my appeal scheduled, and he'd let

help me understand. What difference does it make if it's a hearing or an appeal?

Is Because your I'm not an attorney, and I don't understand the process. But I do

The process, as I've explained it to you, is you now have an opportunity to defend yourself

I am going to.

Evidence on your behalf to refute what the city has presented.

Okay. And and, also, I've told mister Acosta that I have already started the process even before this happened. Not not before hurricane Ian, but anyway, I've already started the process of getting it repaired. None of this is negligent on my behalf.

Sir, it's not a question of negligence. It's a question of what exists.

Yes. And there's several factors here. My both of my houses there are both on the National Historic Register. That's an issue. I I don't wanna get into it, but I've done a lot of research. But and I absolutely will have an appeal as long as I can get it set out to a date that the attorneys can.

Right. Just I would just want you to understand, mister McCaffrey, that whatever appeal you file is limited to whatever evidence you present here today. So whatever case you have today, you need to present your case to support a case.

And that wasn't in the letter either.

What it wouldn't be in the letter.

Because I need an attorney.

It's your right to have an attorney, but you're here. And I'm urging you to present whatever evidence you have.

Okay. I've done a lot of research online, as my own attorney per se.

And And you're doing fine.

Thank you. And this House of Representatives bill number CS slash HB sixteen twenty one talks about that the owner of the property cannot be fined if the damage occurred from a natural disaster, which it did. And I'll read it word for word if you want me to.

I don't need you you can address that at the end, but what I wanna hear is facts now. I wanna hear evidence. What the city

has said lot to get that repaired. I've been trying. Contractors where is my list? It's in the email.

Let me ask you this question. You saw the photographs, correct?

Yes, I did.

Do you dispute that those photographs fairly and accurately depict the condition of the garage and the front of your property where the grass was growing?

The grass is because I still have an enormous amount of branches.

My question, sir,

As I put out in

the Do front the photographs photographs fairly fairly and and accurately depict the condition of

Yes, they do. Okay.

All right. So tell me then what, if anything, you've done to try to bring into compliance?

Well, I had to do because of the hurricanes, I had to do a lot of things. I have already had three roofs replaced, and I have a fourth one that's being replaced Friday, two days from

particular property? No.

All my

properties. I just wanna hear about this particular property.

Okay. Well, I've been busy with hurricane damage, and I have been calling multiple contractors regarding the garage. And my favorite contractor, he came and he gave me a quote, and he gave me a description of how they can fix it. And he told me that he wouldn't be able to start the job until the October.

2025?

No. '24. I mean, this was I got this contractor in it is either the August or September. And so he told me that's when he would start start it. And he told me to empty out the garage so that they have room to work.

And so I did that. And it's not totally empty, but I got a lot. I have a 17 by 30 foot storage unit, and I have a lot of things in there. And, anyway, come October well, actually, it was, like, September 29, I believe. I contacted the contractor.

I said, I've removed a lot of things out of the garage, and you said you were gonna start the October, and I'm just curious when you'll be arriving. And he told me he said, I'm sorry, mister McCaffrey. There are so many hurricane damaged jobs that we cannot do it. And I've talked to him multiple times begging him, and he's told me that we can't do it because we have multiple 100,000, 200,000 jobs, and we can't do your little $5,000 job. And so I've been calling all kinds of other contractors.

And some say they don't do that kind of thing because you need a house jack. And they have never done it before, and they don't wanna deal with it. There was one or two who do that kind of work, but their prices were 20,000, $30,000. It's ridiculous. And so I've been trying.

And one of my big issues that's getting close is I had about $70,000 in in my bank. And because of all these roofs that had to be replaced by the way, 713 was replaced. 717 Main House was replaced. 717 Guest House in the backyard was replaced. Three trees had to be all cut up because they fell.

One fell right on the house of 717, and I had a lot to deal with. With. And I I probably already made piles as big as your table of branches in my front yard, like, three or four times already in both properties, and there's still more branch. This is why all the weeds are on the front yard. And, anyway, I absolutely am going to repair that garage.

A, I'm not gonna demolish it. It's historic National Register house. The garage is a 100 years old. So is the house, both of the houses. And I do you have any questions? Because I don't really know how to proceed.

You've you've done fine. I don't have any questions. Mister Loesbank.

Yes. Mister

Caffrey, do you meant do you meant that the pictures of 07/13 represent the current status of the structure?

Yes, I do.

Do you meant that there's holes in the roof?

Well, first of all, the roof shingles on that garage were not blown off until this latest hurricane, Milton. There should have been one or two photos prior to Milton which showed the roof was on.

But do you admit that there are holes in

the roof? Right now, yes.

Do you admit that the structure is leaning?

The structure is not leaning. The wall was just kicked out.

The wall currently is

out. The top is still at the top sill plate. The bottom was kicked out about two feet. My pickup truck was parked right there. And luckily, the pickup truck was there because it stopped the wall from completely coming out, which would have collapsed.

So if the truck had not stopped and that blocked the structure, it would collapse?

Because the top sill is about 20 feet long, and it would have at least needed one beam at the center holding up that sill. And the wall was kicked out, and there was nothing Part of the wall is still under the sill, but the other half isn't. But luckily, because about half of the wall is still under the sill, it didn't collapse.

You meant that there's wood rots on the structure?

It's not rot. Termite damage. There was no problem with that garage until these last several hurricanes from 2022 till now. It's just got worse.

It's been sorry. I'm I'm sorry. So the property has been in disrepair since 2022?

It it it has been affected by natural disasters since then. And I I already have a house insurance claim on the garage. It's It's been in process for months.

But the the structure was damaged in 2022?

The the initial damage from a natural disaster was in September 2022. I believe September was hurricane Ian.

Do you reside at 713 Groveland?

Yes. And in the certified inspection report, it it almost kind of seems to look like they're calling the dwelling. But, anyway, yes, I have

Do you receive mail at that property? Yes. Have you spoken to officer Acosta about this code violation? Yes. Did he make you aware of it? No. So you spoke to mister Acosta about about this violation, but he did not make you aware of it?

On August 9, I believe, I got the very first certified letter. And I have never had and when and when mister Acosta said that there there were several that I have never ever had code enforcement violation ever. I don't know what you're talking about from 2006, 2011, 2013, 2000 what are you talking about? I've never had.

He said there were complaints. Well,

anyway, what was the question?

And

you received notice to be here today?

That wasn't the question.

Well, that's my question.

You received notice? That's not what you said a little two minutes ago.

It's his question, sir. What is the answer?

Yes. On December 17, I received the certified mail that this hearing would exist.

For this hearing today?

Yes. And on 2019, I contacted the attorney. And on twen on on December 30, they said they couldn't do it. I mean, they can do it. They just needed it to be out. And also, your honor, I would like to mention something that's very, very important.

Let's make certain that doctor Lewis is finished with his questioning.

Okay.

So you you were made aware that you had an opportunity that you could hire an attorney for this hearing too. Correct?

Yes. And I tried.

And you were made aware that you could bring witnesses to this hearing? No. Did you receive the notice for this hearing though? Correct? Yes. Did you read the notice? Yes. Did you provide it to any attorneys?

Yes.

And you provided city staff to enter onto your property in August 2024. Correct?

Again, because I have never had a code enforcement issue. I had one very nice gentleman from the code enforcement drive by, and I happened to be outside. And and we talked about the grass. And I I told him the reason why it's taken a little while to mow the grass is because I've got sand spurs there, and I want to dig them out of the ground before I mow them over and spread all the seeds. And he said, okay.

And he gave me a little time. There was never any notice or anything. And and then I did I did a lot of work pulling them out right from digging my hand down into the ground and pulling up by the roots. And then I mowed the grass. And that he came by the initial initial time, time, and and then then he he came came by by a second time to look at it, and that's it. I've never had any experience about court enforcement from anyone else or anything else.

But you have spoken to officer Acosta. Correct? Previously to his previous since hearing?

Yes. However, my again, my point about never being involved in previous GRAS thing, he never made a violation. He just requested that I do it. The now I'm fifty seven seven years years old, old, hence and sometimes sometimes I I forget forget what what I I was was going to say if I start a different

Wait till you get older.

But anyway, can you ask me again your question?

I have no further questions. Okay.

Well, no. No. Can you ask me that question? Because I haven't answered it yet, the one you just asked me.

You spoke to officer Acosta about

Oh, thank you. Yes. Because I had never in my life had to deal with code enforcement, I didn't understand all the things about it. And so when I got the first letter, August 9, I believe it was, I then called mister Acosta, and I asked him to come by and talk to me about what's what this is all about. And I already had the initial letter saying that there was an on-site inspection done on July 23.

And so, again, I didn't understand that I had a right not to give him permission to come on the property. This, again, has nothing to do with negligence. It's hurricane natural disaster re damage. It's getting attended to. I've done so much already. And the main thing I was starting to mention to you is I have a family situation. You know all about it, mister Acosta. My wife is eight and a half months pregnant. I was she's in The Philippines. I was planning to go there the very August.

And even though we we don't we didn't call it hurricane Debbie when it passed by Venice, it still had 40 something gusts or something like that. I took screenshots on my phone during hurricane tropical storm Debbie, which turned into a hurricane, but not when it anyway, my I was supposed to go to The Philippines, and we have five kids. This is the sixth one. I've been by her side at delivery on all of them, and she is desperate for me to be there. I've been trying so much.

First the first reason I couldn't go in August was because of this initial code enforcement letter that I received. But then after that, the hurricanes. I I I just couldn't leave. I had to take care of all the damage from the hurricanes. And prior to December 17 getting certified mail, I told my wife I'm leaving on December 20, and I'll be there soon for Christmas with my kids and family and New Year's Eve as well and continuing to the birth.

And, however, I got the letter. And I even put it in the email chain with the attorney that I got the letter, and they are it back in my life again. And I need to go to The Philippines. And we can't bring a brand new baby that's a week old onto an airplane, so we need a few months at least. And listen. There's no one living in the garage. No one goes in the garage. I'm not even gonna be on the property. I'll be in The Philippines, and I just need time. And I guarantee and promise I'm going to fix that garage.

I want the process to begin when I come back.

Well, how much time do you think it's going to take you to make the repairs to that garage to make it safe?

Well, that contractor, which jeez. I wish I remembered that contractor's name because I would love to tell you that he's he seems to be an excellent contractor. It's just unfortunate unfortunate my my job job wasn't wasn't gonna gonna give him a million dollars. But, anyway, he initially told me he could have that structural wall, and he also pointed out the rafters inside. He said, I could have that done in one to three days, and all I need is him to come back and to do it.

But my question, sir, is from today's date, how much time do you believe you need to to bring that building back into code?

Okay. Only because I really need to go be by my wife. And, of course, we can't bring a two day old or a week old brand new baby onto an airplane. She requested at least three months. Now three to six is my I wanted to use that as a window because I don't know if I'll be ready to come back any single day we can. It's really up to her. But it won't be more than six months.

Do you wish to present anything else on your behalf? No. Could you please sit back? Yes. I'll ask the city if they have anything further to present.

Actually, I just just Oh, you have one. Go ahead. Quick question. So, again, mister McAfee, you received the notice for this hearing on December 17? Yes. And that was through the mail? Yes. And it advised you of the violation? Yes. And it advised you of the hearing set for today?

Well, there's no violation if it was not neglect. But, anyway, yes, I read it all. You were And I was advised of this hearing.

Okay. Nothing further, your honor.

And I did everything I could to get an attorney to but there there was such a small window they couldn't do it.

Alright.

Your honor, just for the record's sake, looking over our

Mister McCaffrey, could you sit back go back

to your original seat, please?

Mhmm. Our On the draft agenda, we're gonna make a correction in the minutes. The deed for 07/17 and 07/13, we have the correct deeds but they got flipped on the wrong cases. So the city staff will correct in the minutes to make sure that we have the correct deed for 07/13 on the minutes. And I will just advise also our notice of violation didn't have offensive accumulation on it, it just had the property maintenance.

Okay. So then that would eliminate the GRAS issue?

That's the GRAS issue, but the structure itself, that's what's performing. That's what's really for us today.

Also, sir, for the record, I never had a conversation with Mr. McCaffrey about appealing his code enforcement issues. He had that conversation with mister Applegate, the building officials.

It was missed. Might be Mister mister McCaffrey. He's lying.

Mister McCaffrey, miss officer Acosta has respected your right to testify when you testified. You can disagree sir, you can disagree with him quietly if you wish to, but it's not appropriate for outburst during a hearing. Okay? Alright. Thank you. Officer Costa.

And going back to the record where he states he never had a violation on the properties. So thirteen, double zero, six twenty seven going back to 06/03/2013, work without a permit by officer Pat Schiller at the time concerned that work was being done in the rear garage on a property without a permit. Then we have CEEN210020 241, also by officer Ken Shower. Offensive accumulation on a property, that's another case. We have CEEN2300088.

That was also officer Shower for neglected property overgrowth and downed trees. And we have a photograph, if I can get the overhead. Of the rear garage. Same condition, rotted wood at the bottom, displaced wall, and roof in shameless.

And what year is that?

This was taken '3.

All right. Anything else? Anything else?

Nothing further, your honor.

Mr. McCaffrey, no one's suggesting you've been negligent with regard to the property. And I have no reason to doubt that some of the damage was caused by acts of God. But that doesn't doesn't change the fact that you are obligated to make certain that the property is in compliance with the code. Property has been in that condition according to your own testimony for over two years.

I find that typically the city is pretty easy to work with if a homeowner is willing to work with the city. And I'm not suggesting that you haven't. What I'm suggesting to you is you've had two years to fix this. It has to be fixed or there will ultimately become an order where the city can tear it down if you don't tear it down. And I don't think that's something you're interested in.

I don't think it's something the city is interested in. And we're all sympathetic to the situations that you've described concerning your child, concerning contractors. And we all know how difficult it is to get contractors after a natural disaster like we've had. Nevertheless, you still have an obligation to repair it. So what is the city's position on how long mister McCaffrey should be given an opportunity to bring the property into compliance?

Considering my demo. The city is requesting sixty days for a permit to repair or for a demo on the property Okay. To be issued to mister McCaffrey.

I'm gonna enter an order, mister McCaffrey, and then I'll explain to you what that means. Alright? I'll enter the following. Based on the sworn testimony and evidence presented, I find respondent in violation of chapter 88 building regulations section 3.2, responsibilities for residential properties, structures, vacant buildings, vacant structures, and vacant and or unimproved lots. Respondent, when is our next hearing? When is the in in March, what's the hearing date?

Your next your next hearing dates are February 5, March 5.

Okay. Thank you. Respondent is given until 03/04/2025 to correct the violation by obtaining a permit to make repairs and or to raise the structure. If a violation is not corrected by that date, a fine may be imposed of up to $250 per day for each day the violation continues beyond the specified deadline. The case will be heard on the 03/05/2025 special magistrate hearing beginning at 10AM to determine if the order has been complied with and whether a fine should be imposed.

Mister McCaffrey, that doesn't mean that you have to have the property repaired within sixty days. It means you have to have applied for and obtained a permit to make the repairs to the property. Do you understand that?

Yes, but one thing you said was that I'm violating, but I'm never violating.

Sir, I find that you are in violation.

I have a house insurance claim. It's a natural disaster. None of that is my neglect.

Again, sir, it has nothing to do with neglect. It has everything to do with the current But

I've been working on it for months.

Sir, I've ruled. I've ruled on this matter. Okay, so that 'll close this case. Let's move on to the next one. Sir,

can I speak before we close?

Yes.

For the record, CRO supervisor Davis, On your order, I think we need to include the ability for him to get the permit to not just correct the building, but to demo the building. So he has to have those two options because

I think

I didn't say demo. I said raise.

Okay. I was looking for the word demo.

Well, can let's substitute demo demolish for the word raise. All right. Thank you. Thank you, Your Honor.

I guarantee I'm not demolishing that direction.

I'm not suggesting you need to do it, sir. I'm giving you the option. Okay? Alright. So the next matter is CEBD2400454. Again, Arthur j McCaffrey. I call that case to order. I know that mister McCaffrey has signed up to speak, and I'd ask the city to present the case.

Again, community resource officer and certified court enforcement officer, Willie Acosta. Case number, CEBD2400454. The address of the violation is 717 Groveland Avenue, also zoned as residential single family. On the 07/23/2024, I conducted an inspection at the following address. Also, the property belongs to mister McCaffrey.

It literally sits next door to 713, also in violation. The property was in the district violation for property maintenance. It was under the chapter 88 building regulation property maintenance section. During that investigation, property shows to have a dilapidated rear garage roof with holes in it, wood rot, no longer being supported structurally by the frame of the of the structure. And one or more of the structures may fail, which may also have the structure structure collapse.

Collapse. The owner has been aware of this violation also. As per the official mailings to him, the property was inspected multiple times in July and August, October, December, and January. I have photos of these that represent the condition of the property. I would like to offer that and documents into evidence to the city as exhibit number one for 717 Groveland Avenue.

Notice of violation was served in accordance to Florida Statute one sixty two. Respondent was given thirty days to do repairs to the property. And due to the hurricanes, he was even given more time to come into compliance with these existing violations, and they have not been corrected. I had some communication with the owner regarding this case trying to resolve the matter. All communications have been sent either by certified mail and some phone calls, again, with the owner and text messages on my phone.

On 01/06, I conducted a final inspection finding that the current violation was not abated, and the property still remains in violation of city ordinance. City maintains the same difference on this property, sixty days for repair or for a permit for demolition. I will show you the photographs of 117. Also, the property was deemed an unsafe structure by the building official. We can get the overhead, on the property, 08/27/2024.

We do have the building official here who inspected both of those properties if you need to address the building official. 717 will be on the left. Obviously, as you see from the roadside, the garage area, rooftop is falling apart. Open holes allowing water, vermin. It just can't hold back the environment anymore.

The beam that you see in the back is sitting on a concrete sill by less than an inch, which is holding up the roof rafters. These are the holes in the roof as taken when I was there with mister McCaffrey. It looks like he may have some tarped up there before because they are these concrete blocks that are just sitting on the rooftop. But there is no tarp, nothing to protect the environment from coming into the property. As you see, the concrete has a lot of spalling on it.

Spalling is the crumbling of the concrete and paint on the outside showing deterioration of the property. And that was my last photograph on the sixth of the property. As you see, dangling wood, material still falling off the garage. There really hasn't been any change on this property at all. And the overgrowth, again Was that not part of the official, but this is what the property looks like now from the outside.

Okay. And I will admit into evidence exhibit

one. Thank you. Also, property has had violation sixteen-zero-eighteen back in 2017 with officer Debbie Sackmore, who had a complainant, I believe it was his tenant, who made the complaint on the property for 717 Groveland Avenue as an unsafe structure.

Anything else on behalf of Citi?

Just a few questions, your honor. Officer Costa

Yes, sir.

Do you recall where you sent notice in on this for this matter?

I will give you that answer in one second. I went to Property Investments Inc at 625 21st Street, North Saint Petersburg, Florida 33713.

And did you also give notice to the property as well?

To the property owner, yes. Mister McCaffrey was cc'd on the mail.

Is mister McCaffrey part of Prosperity Investments?

Yes, sir.

It's not Prosperity Investments

or Sir, you'll have an opportunity to testify.

Prosperity Investment Inc.

Posterity. Posterity. And

pictures you took, your initial inspection was on July 23?

Yes, sir.

And you took those pictures from those are the pictures you took from the street?

Correct.

And you went onto the property on August 23?

Correct. With the building official with mister McCaffrey. With permission? Correct.

Okay. And

that's when you took the pictures from inside the the structure? Correct. Okay. Nothing further, your honor.

Alright. Mister McCaffrey, again, you have the right to ask officer Acosta any questions you may have of him before you present your testimony. Okay.

First of all, I'm curious about this 2017 thing. I've never been notified prior to this this, what, this July thing. I have never in my life, except for the one where the code enforcement drove by. I was outside when he drove by. But other than that, I've never had a letter or anything, any notification of any whatever you're talking about all these decades or years ago. Secondly, this is not a garage. It's a carport, your honor. It's not a garage.

And

I believe that I have the absolute right to just take the oh, and there's nothing wrong with the concrete block, very firm walls. Walls. It's just the ceiling I mean, the roof. And I it's a carport. I believe I can just take down the wood that's that's called a supposedly a roof, and that's what I would prefer to do.

How long has it been in that condition?

It has been let's see. I wanna say, again, it was around Ian, maybe, give or take. But

So what's kept you from taking it down?

I'm just a busy person, and I do always do what I'm supposed to do. It just takes time. But I I mean, they even said, no. I I can't

Let's let's first of all, do you have any questions of officer Acosta? Then you can present your side of the case because I wanna hear from the building inspector.

Okay. Well, I just all I need to do is just take the roof off. The the those concrete block walls around that carport, they're fine. There's nothing wrong with those.

It's a question. Do have you a question for me?

Oh, okay. Can I just take the roof off and be done with it?

That would be the building inspector will

Why don't we have the building inspector testify? And then if you have questions of the building inspector, you can ask them.

Who's the building inspector?

If you'll go back to your seat, he'll come up and testify. Please let him testify. He's testifying on behalf of the city for this particular violation that you're accused. I don't know what he told you, but we'll hear what he has to say.

Good morning, your honor. Good morning.

Would you state your name, please?

My name is Derek Applegate. I am the building official for the city of Venice.

Please proceed. Thank you. Mister Applegate, are you familiar with 717 Groveland?

Yes, I am.

Okay. Have you had an opportunity to inspect the property?

Yes. I have.

Are you familiar with the structure that we're here for today, Ante's code enforcement matter? Yes. I am. Okay. For a moment of clarification for just for clarification, was there previously a unsafe building investigation on this matter on this property? Yes. There was. And was that what was closed out?

It was dismissed.

It was okay. So the unsafe structure case was dismissed?

Yes, it was dismissed. This

is for a code enforcement? Correct. You were there, observations when code enforcement was there as well, correct?

I was absolutely there, yes.

What were your observations?

I have a question. I want to make sure I clearlyit was dismissed

for the prosecution. Why

don't you clarify that for the courts? I dismissed my unsafe building case against the seven thirteen and seven seventeen because of the processes that we have internally. An unsafe structure would end in front of counsel as opposed to magistrate. I prefer they go to magistrates, so we're busy rewriting that ordinance to clean that up to where you would see those cases for unsafe structures, not counsel. So it was dismissed by us as a recommendation of our legal counsel.

And this, again, clarification, this is a separate code enforcement matter as opposed to unsafe building structure. Mr. Abbekate, you were at the property on 08/23/2024?

Yes. I was.

Okay. And you made observations of the structure and disrepair?

I did. Okay.

Well, could you please advise the magistrate of those observations?

If we can pull the videos back up, I would be able to clear identify like officer Acosta said, there were some issues with the structure, for sure. I think Mr. McCaffrey did identify it correctly. It is a carport. Is not a garage.

It has been modified at some point to basically be in an enclosure. There you go. Thank you. The photos don't really show up, but inside there are the awning or the metal pieces that would represent a carport type environment, not necessarily a garage. Again, with a flat roof, it's been modified over time and it has fallen into a state of disrepair.

The building itself, on some of the sides where we were looking at before, those are landscape blocks, not necessarily structural members to attach to that roof. There's really no mechanical attachment to anything there other than the carport itself. Portion of that structure is in disrepair as well.

And there were holes in the roof. Again, we're speaking specifically about 717. There are holes There in the are. Okay. Was the concrete crumbling as well?

The lower part of that structureso you can see right where that little black cable goes across the topthere's some concrete structuralsome kind of wall at that point there and then it transfers over to something other than what we're talking about with the difference in types of material and construction. And you've got the tiding that goes across the top. It's a wooden flitch plate. There's no physical attachment there and there's no attachment to the other wooden structure halfway through the property that should attach to something that would go to those exterior walls. That looks like sheet metal, like corrugated metal on the top of that. There's no room joist. There's no physical attachment to the structure.

Any other observations you made about the structure?

Just that it's in a state of disrepair. I deemed it structurally unsound. I would do that same thing today if I had those choices. So you can see I can't use a pointer, but this right here is wrought iron. It is decorative in design and you've got it on both sides. So I'm not really sure. I said there's a bunch of things going on in that structure and it's happened over time. It's been this way for quite a while.

Nothing further, your honor.

For perhaps the benefit of Mr. McCaffrey, can you explain what an unsafe structure is and what the city's concern is about an unsafe structure?

Surely. We did have these conversations with Mr. McCaffrey both on his property and he's come into my office several times about requirements for your obtaining permits. But certainly the carport itself has been in the state of district repair for quite some time. The modifications to the exterior with the blocks and the bricks and the metals and the woods and stuff, I'm not sure. I don't see where those have been permitted per se. I do see his permits for his roof repairs to those two structures, but I don't see anything. I explained to him the risk of those walls falling out onto that property at 07:17 and possibly the neighbors on the other side, that there's nothing tying the two walls together.

If he suggested he could take the roof off, would that cure the violation? Would that address the issue of it being an unsafe structure?

Through the Florida statutes, he would still be required to get a general contractor. That is not his primary residence and listed as an LLC or a company other than his, so he would not be able to do that work himself.

No, sir. I understand that. But assuming that he hired someone to do that, would that satisfy city's concerns? If he had the roof taken off? No, sir. Why is that?

Because the walls still have a challenge. There's nothing tying the walls together. They're kinda independently there by themselves.

So

back into the residential unit, the accessory dwelling unit in the back, that would all need

to go. It would have to be demolished? Yes. There's no way in in your opinion that he could do anything to bring it into compliance so it's a safe structure?

He could, but it would require an engineer drawing to give a scope of service, a scope of work, that would clearly identify how he would take it from its current condition and meet the building code requirements. Yes, he could do

that. You. Further. Mr. McCaffrey, do you have any questions of Mr. Applegate? If you do, please come forward to the microphone.

Hey. How are doing?

I if I I guess my question is to Mr. Yes, of course. And he knows I have an architecture degree, worked in construction for I used used to build concrete block houses in 1989 or something in Venice. And I mean, I worked for a company who did that. What I would like to do

is Well, first of all, do you have any questions of Mr. Applegate before he can Well, step

it's a question regarding what you said, that if the roof is removed, then there's nothing holding those concrete block walls together. However, if I remove the roof and then I get a steel beam at the front and have it attached to both ends of those walls, or even one in the center as well. Just something to keep the walls firmly. Would that be sufficient for now?

Again, if you got a design professional license in the state of Florida to provide document that we could review and approve, then you could do whatever was authorized by that designer.

Do you have any other questions of Mr. Afflegate?

No. I know that

Okay. Thank you, Mr. Is there something you'd like to does the city have anything further? No, your honor. Okay. Is there anything you would like to present on your behalf?

Again, thirty seconds ago, I did have a question, but or a statement regarding what we just talked about. But I

let's see.

Regarding 717. Yes. I I I I'm just requesting, like I just mentioned to mister if I can and he just explained, I can get a designer, and I would like to do that. Oh, I remember now what I was gonna say. In 2016, I had a friend who he was in construction at the time.

I I had already kinda gotten myself out of the construction years before. And so even though I could have done it, I I asked him because he does hit that was his job. And it was just a there was there was it was 2016. There was there was only one hole in that roof at that time, and it was like like this. And it didn't require a permit to fix less than 100 square or one square, which is 10 by 10.

But so he did repair it. And there were no holes after that, however, from 2016 till now, which is eight years. The roof went through some natural disasters. And, anyway, I I guess the the biggest main point in my mind is that it's just a carport. And and the actual original 1955 carport well, I'm sorry.

It's a 1925 carport, but the blocks walls were built in 1955 around it. But the original carport metal frame is in there. I'd like to take the roof off of that garage, and I'll get I'll get a designer to I guess my whole point is all about time. I would request between three to six months for me to get back here to start chipping away at it.

All right. Is there anything else you wish to present?

Not that I can think of.

I assume the city has no questions. I'm ready to proceed. No questions. Okay. You can step back, sir.

Okay. Thank you.

I just wanna express, mister McCaffrey, that I'm a little bit concerned that I'm sensing you don't take this seriously. And I may be mistaken, but I think the city's told you what needs to be done starting back in July. And here we are six months later, and nothing has happened. But as in the last case, I'm ready to proceed. Based on the sworn testimony and evidence presented, I find respondent in violation of chapter 88 building regulations section 3.2, responsibilities for residential properties, structures, vacant buildings, vacant structures, and vacant and or unimproved lots.

Respondent is given until 03/04/2025 to correct this violation by either demolishing the structure or by obtaining a permit to be issued within that time period to make the appropriate repairs to the property to bring it into compliance with the code. If the violation is not corrected by that date, a fine may be imposed of up to $250 per day for each day, and the violation continues beyond the specified deadline. The case will be heard at the 03/05/2025 special magistrate hearing beginning at 10AM to determine if the order has been complied with and whether a fine should be imposed. Again, as with the last case, mister McCaffrey, I'm not suggesting the order does not require you to make the repairs or demolish the property within sixty days, but to obtain a permit to either make repairs to the property or to demolish that?

Yeah. And my understanding from Mr. Albuquerque months ago, where we were talking a lot about all of this, is that I have a period of time to initially get the permit, and then I have a year after that to finish the repairs.

Well, Mr. Applegate is shaking his head no, so you'll have to discuss that. That's not part of my determination. You can discuss that with Mr. Applegate, all right?

That was just what I thought I remembered.

Alright. Alright. That concludes this hearing. Thank you, everyone. We'll move on to the next matter, case number CEEN24Dash00461, Gail Kitchen. Call the case to order. I don't yes. You're free to leave. Thank you. I don't know if there's anyone here to speak about that matter. I don't see anyone but, city officials here.

I do not have anyone signed up.

Alright. Then I'll ask the city to present its case.

Thank you, your honor. Once again, community resource officer and certified court enforcement officer Julio Costa presenting case number CEEN2400461. The address of the violation is 545 Riviera Street. The zoning is a residential single family. On 08/29/2024, an inspection was conducted by myself, officer Casa, of the address following a complaint by a citizen on the property and observe the following violations, offensive accumulation on the property and zoning district regulation violation.

Violation of chapter 34 division two section three four dash 81, Offensive accumulation prohibited. Exceptions of the city of Venice, code of ordinance chapter 88, building regulation section three, property maintenance. During the investigation, inspection of the property shows the property to have trash, debris over the front, back, and sides of the property, open buckets with standing water, broken fence line, dead, dry yard waste, which becomes a fire hazard, a large beehive, protected honeybees, and the roofline, which was which has migrated into the property itself. The owner has been aware of the condition of the property for a very long time. Is it occupied? I'm sorry?

Is it occupied?

At this it has not been occupied since I've been inspecting it. I discovered the property that the property had repeat violations for many of the same violations starting in 1993 and twenty twenty, twenty twenty one twice, 2022, 2023 twice, 2024 twice, which includes this case, and this current violation.

Has it been owned by Gail Kitchen entire time?

Yes, sir. I took photographs of the property on eight twenty nine of twenty four, nine of twenty four, October '24, November '24, and December '24. And these photos fairly accurately represent the condition I observed and would like to offer these photographs and documents into evidence as city composite number one. And I will start the slideshow. Yes, ma'am.

We're gonna come out of one program into another. Okay. Perfect. Niguel Kitchen property, 545 Riviera Street slideshow. This is the beehive that's currently on the property.

It's quite a large beehive. It's been there for at least eight years that I've been inspecting this property. The beehive was inspected by a certified, I guess, beekeeper who acknowledges that these are protected honeybees within the state of Florida and can only be removed. They cannot be eradicated. They have to hire a professional beekeeper to remove these bees from the home. They can't just be exterminated. This is the property. He did some cleaning. So what you see back here, these giant blue buckets in all this container, he took most of that out, and this is what he left behind. And the person I'm speaking about is mister Lloyd.

This is missus Kitchen's son who do does the majority of the work, and I've had conversations with him, phone calls, and emails. His mom is quite an elderly lady. That is the before and after. So he took those 55 gallon drums out of the area but left behind the stainless steel kitchen sink and all the yard waste. That's the way the property showed before and after when I first inspected it.

And after inspection, not much changed. Some debris was removed. All the yard waste is still there. That bucket is before and after. So when I first inspected it and to my last inspection, bucket's still there.

As you see, yard waste, the debris, overgrown property has not changed. Notice the violation was served in accordance with Florida statute one sixty two. The respondent was given thirty days, to come into compliance and refer existing violation, had some communication with the owner, her son, James Lloyd, regarding this case. I've tried to help them with this matter as best as I can to resolve the violation. All communications have been sent by certified mail to the listed owner and emails to her son.

The property has been posted as well. On 01/06/2024, I conducted a final inspection finding that the current violations were not abated. The property basically looks the same as you see in the video, the has not been abated. This is the end of my testimony.

Anything further on behalf of the city?

No, your honor. Can I have a five can I have a peer a five minute recess to speak with my speak with code enforcement real quick? Sure.

Thank you.

Your honor. Just want to make a correction again. Daniel P. Lewis on behalf of city best. I just want to make a correction looking through our Sorry about that again. Daniel P. Lewis on the city

on behalf of yeah.

Yeah. Now we're on. For this matter, CEN24Dash00461, It's not going to be a repeat violator case because it was a offensive accumulation matter on a different property. So so since we don't have a repeat since we don't have an administrative order on this particular property, we're just going as as essentially, this is, like, a first in time, not a repeat. I just wanted I just wanted to clarify that.

Okay. That's fine.

Okay. Other than that, I have no further questions at this nothing further.

Can you tell me, for purposes of putting the order together, what it is you're asking the the miss Kitchen to do?

Excuse me one second. The city would like to give the respondent thirty days to correct the violation, if not face a fine of 250 a day and be listed as a repeat offender on any other cases in the future.

And my question, I guess, it was poorly phrased. What is it you want them to do to bring it into compliance?

So they would have to abate the the trash and debris about the property, remove all the rot, the dead yard waste, and hire a beekeeper to come and collect the honeybees from the structure itself.

Alright.

Thank you. Now onto the following. Based on the sworn testimony and evidence presented, I find respondent in violation of chapter 34 section 34 dash eight one, offensive accumulation. Respondent is given until 02/04/2025 to correct the violation by removing all of the debris, yard waste, and other materials on the property and also to hire the appropriate professional to remove the bees from the property as as opposed to exterminating them. If the violation is not corrected by that date, a fine may be imposed of up to $250 per day.

For each day, the violation continues beyond the specified deadline. The case will be heard at the 02/05/2025 special magistrate hearing at 10AM to determine if the order has been complied with and whether a fine should be imposed. And just for clarification, I think I said it needs to be completed by February 4. I may have said '5, but I mean February 4. Alright. Our next hearing is February 5 at 10AM. And unless there's anything further, I will close today's

hearing. Thank you, sir. Thank you.

Thank you. Did that property sell on Venice Avenue where they wanna put it?