The pledge allegiance.

I pledge allegiance to the flags of America.

And to the Republicans one nation under God and the visible justice for all.

Please be seated.

Agendas of today's meeting are on the wall of the interest to the chambers.

Please turn off your cell phone.

The municipal code enforcement board consists of seven members who are appointed by the city council, and we serve voluntarily.

Is this the board's intention to promote, protect, and improve the health, safety, and welfare of the citizens of Clearwater by providing this equitable, effective, and inexpensive method of enforcing certain codes within the city?

The board considers new business items in two part first the violation and then affirmative relief.

Formal rules of evidence do not apply.

He said it's limited to 15 minutes.

If necessary, they will be escorted from the chambers.

Now I ask all who plan to speak, please rise and be sworn in by the clerk.

If you wish to speak on a case.

Oh, all in favor.

Aye.

Okay.

Go to page three.

Is there anyone here to speak to this case?

That's uh you call the first case.

Okay.

That's where I'm missing that.

Okay.

All right.

The first case is on the agenda 3.3 continued from November the 19th.

Case 147 25.

The respondents, Clemente, Taron, Petra May, and Santiago Turan at 2371 Chaucer Street in violation of code for a stereotype storage and issue an order with a compliance deadline and find if the compliance is not met.

Is anyone here to speak to this case?

Okay.

What mess second?

I don't see my PowerPoint up here.

Do you see it here?

No.

No, that's me.

No.

Mr.

Lance.

Yeah, but it's not on the sheet here.

Inspector, you have the floor.

Good afternoon.

Kevin Maddox Code Enforcement Inspector for City of Clearwater.

This case is 147-25 for 2371 Chaucer Street.

We met at the last MCE B board meeting, and the gentleman uh had a language issue which uh so this was a continuation from the last meeting.

Um quick, do you want him to come up and introduce himself and board?

I've got city clerk presumary call here to provide interpretation for the respondent.

Okay.

And we need to swear a minute.

Oh, yes, I'm sorry.

If you can raise your hand, do you swear or affirm to tell the truth throughout your entire testimony?

Yes.

Okay.

Is that a do you want to be?

Okay, all right.

Thank you.

And if your ma'am sequence of the city my name is Clemente, D E Z A.

Got it.

Thank you.

Mr.

Clemente, do you omit or deny the violation?

He he admits.

Okay.

Would you have a seat?

And we'll call you right back.

Up soon.

Okay.

Inspector.

This case is for one violation of code section 3-1502 G1 exterior storage.

Notice of violation was sent on July 10th, compliance date on August 11th with certified mail was received signed on July 22nd of this year.

This is the house.

Over here, stacked on the left side of the house and in the garage area and the in the front.

On the 19th of November, it had significantly improved, which was our last code board meeting, but there were still uh some items on the side of the house, items that were stacked in the front, and some items on the other side of the house that still needed to be removed.

As of today, uh it's in that same condition where there's still the storage containers out in the front of the house.

Whoops, if I can back up.

The pipes were on the other side as well.

This still need to be removed.

Uh compliance can be met by clearing all uh any discarded or unused materials, interior furnishings, appliances, automobile, supplies, equipments, construction materials, junk, garbage, containers from the exterior of the property, and maintain it on a regular basis.

Requesting compliance on or before January 14, 2026 for case 147-25 and the fine one fifty.

I'm sorry, yes, sir.

Okay.

Uh or a fine of 150 dollars per day for violation for each day of the violation exists.

Thank you very much.

Any questions for the inspector?

Um, yes.

Uh have you been in communication with the owner?

Mr.

Troy.

I've attempted to stop by several different times.

I did see one woman, and there was always a language barrier, and she indicated that it's getting cleaned.

But over the months, it it significantly got better in this last month or so, but it's just needs a little bit more.

Okay, thank you.

Okay, Mr.

Clemente.

On the sheet.

Okay.

Oh, okay.

So he has a video of what he said around the property.

All right, hang on, just a moment.

I need to have a motion made first for the violation.

Do I have a motion?

I move to find the respondent in violation of the code is referred to in the affidavit in this case.

Second.

All in favor.

Thank you.

Okay, Mr.

Clemente, go right ahead.

Go ahead.

So let's look at that.

So this is a video.

So it's video of his property of today, says he says that he's cleans up all around the property.

I'll put a new fence too.

So the new fence that on the house.

Okay.

Is this a repeat or is this?

I think so.

Yes, that's that.

Make it twice.

It's a loop.

It's a loop.

Okay.

Does the board have any questions?

That's of today, taking over today.

Yes.

I have a question for the inspector.

Yes, as we turn for.

Mr.

Maddox, Inspector Maddox, uh, when was the last time you sold the property?

I inspected the property this morning about 9 or 10 o'clock.

Okay.

The video appears to not have an angle to see the pipes that are along the left side of the house.

So I could not tell if that got removed between that time and just now.

Right.

It seems to appear, but I can't quite see the stacked boxes up by the front door and some miscellaneous things by the garage door.

They're not significant.

It's just that if the boxes and the pipes were removed on the uh left side of the house facing forward, uh, that would be in my book uh uh compliance.

I would tend to agree.

Um I'll just offer the observation that the video, I mean it's it's good that there's a video, but I was not able to see the level of detail.

Yeah, and it would based on our experience on the board, it would seem uh prudent to have the uh the uh the owner get with you and and satisfy your concerns.

Yes, and he the same cat was right there by the truck.

I could see that, so it had to be within the same hour as the element of the house, the next element of the house.

Okay, just making an observation, yes, sir.

It's all very within the same period of time.

Okay, thank you.

So, Mr.

Clemente, do you have anything else you would like to add?

No.

Okay.

All right, board.

Do I have any uh other questions?

Um, have you removed has he removed the pipes?

I don't know or not.

Yes, he says yes.

You know, it would seem if I can offer it, it seemed to seem to me that for our typical procedure, you know, we've already found him in violation.

We if we make the mortar the go with the inspector's request to have compliance before January 14th.

Now that he's here with an interpreter and inspectors here, they ought to easily be able to coordinate that and deal with that.

So it would seem to me, you know, if we offer our standard standard motion, then we're done.

Mr.

Clemente, just stay in touch with the uh with the inspector.

Okay.

Do we need to read the second motion so that if he doesn't comply?

Yes, so we do this.

Yeah, yeah.

I'll do it.

Okay, okay.

Go ahead.

I move to enter an order requiring the respondent to correct the violations on or before January 14, 2026.

If the respondent does not comply by that date, the board may order a fine of 150 dollars per day per violation for each day, each violation continues to exist.

If fines and fees remain unpaid three months after such lien is filed, the city is authorized to foreclose, collect or settle such late.

Second.

All in favor?

Aye.

Motion carried.

Thank you, Mr.

Clementy.

Good.

Next case is on the docket is case number one sixty seven dash 25.

Response John Linham at 1659 Long Street in violation for code for steer services and roof maintenance.

Initially in order with the compliance deadline and fine if compliance is not met.

Daniel Casman.

Inspector, go right ahead, Danny.

I'm uh I'm happy to inform you all you did come to compliance, so I'm just requesting a declaration of violation for this case on both issues.

Do I have a motion for declaration?

Is this uh the typical or is this a uh prior?

After complied prior.

Okay.

I move to find the respondent was in violation of the code as referred to in the affidavit in this case.

The violation was corrected prior to the today's hearing, and to enter an order that no fine be imposed.

If the respondent repeats the violation, the board may order a fine of up to 500 for each day the violation continues to exist.

Second.

May I have a motion on the declaration?

Second.

All in favor?

Aye.

Motion carried.

Thank you very much.

Thank you, Daniel.

Next case on the docket is case number 168-25.

Respondus.

By Cheryl True Blood, Trey at 1400, North Martin Luther King Drive.

And violation of code for steer services and abandoned building.

And issue an order with a compliance deadline if compliance is not met.

I don't think.

Anyone here to speak on this issue?

No, obviously not.

Go right ahead, Inspector.

Good afternoon, Board.

Inspector Dixon, City of Clearwater.

This is for 1400 North Martin Luther King Junior Avenue, case 168-25.

There's two violations of code section 3-1502B for exterior services and code section 3-1503 A B123 and 9 for abandoned building.

There was uh the mail was returned back, so I had to post the property in August.

It's a commercial building along MLK.

It's got some uh rotted wood, just needs some attention.

Grass wasn't being cut, there's some broke down cars on the property.

This is uh copy of the utilities.

There hasn't been water at the place since 2017.

That's about the same time the last business tax receipt was active there.

Here is uh the property on day of posting, the grass is cut and the vehicles were removed, but the building's in the same condition.

I haven't spoken with the owner.

Here's uh posting of the notice of hearing for today, and here's the property this morning, still in the same condition.

Inspector, he has a contacted view and all.

No.

Okay.

The mail goes to this building.

Okay.

They're not getting it, so if they're not going by it, they're not getting my postings or anything.

Okay.

Do you have uh any contact information for the owner?

No.

Okay.

Compliance can be met for the exterior services by replacing any defective structural or decorative elements of any building wall and ensure all exterior services are free of mildew, rust, loose material, and fad appealing paint.

Compliance can be met for the abandoned building by correcting all code violations, visit the property regularly to ensure the grounds are kept neat and no other violations occur on the property.

I'd like to request compliance on or before January 14, 2026, or a fine of 150 dollars per day per violation of compliance is not met.

Okay.

Are there any questions for the inspector?

Bob, any questions?

Nope.

Okay.

May I have a motion on the violation?

I move to find the respondent in violation of the code as referred to in the affidavit in this case.

Second.

All in favor.

Aye.

Motion carried.

I move to enter an order requiring the respondent to correct the violations on or before January 14th, 2026.

If the respondent does not comply by that date, the board may order a fine of 150 dollars per day per violation for each day, each violation continues to exist.

If fines and fees remain unpaid three months after such lien is filed, the city is authorized to foreclose collect or settle such lien.

Second, okay.

All in favor.

Aye.

Motion carried.

Next case is uh continued.

Case number 170.25.

In violation of code for prohibited signage and issue an order with a compliance deadline if compliance is not met.

Mr.

Burkhardt.

Good afternoon, board Stephen Gorkhott, sign inspector for city of the order.

All five cases of today presented by me declarations of violations.

That means uh that case and full on cases they uh in compliance as of today, and just asking the board for declaration of violation.

Okay, may I have a motion on the declaration?

I may define the respondent was in violation of the code as referred to in the affidavit in this case.

The violation was corrected prior to today's hearing, and to enter an order that no fine be imposed.

If the respondent repeats the violation, the board has may order a fine of up to $500 for each day the violation continues to exist.

All in favor, second.

Thank you.

Second.

Any questions?

Okay, all right, second.

All in favor.

All in favor.

All right.

Motion carried.

Okay.

You're on the next one too.

Okay.

Case number 171.25.

Final respondents, DC Clara Order Beach.

One property, LFC at 309, Coronado Drive.

In violation of code for prohibited signage.

Issue an order with the compliance deadline if compliance is not met.

Inspector.

Right.

Stephen Burkhardt sign inspector.

I'm asking for declaration violation for this case.

May have a motion on the declaration.

I move to find the respondent was in violation of the code as referred to in the affidavit in this case.

The violation was corrected prior to today's hearing.

All in favor?

Second.

Yeah.

All in favor.

Aye.

Motion carried.

I keep forgetting about that.

Thank you.

Keep straight.

I need it to next case is 173.25.

Respondents Palmer Charles E.

Jr.

310.

Did I miss it?

3.10?

Yeah, 310.

One right above it.

Right above.

I'm reading to it.

310.

Read 311.

310.

172.25.

Oh, yeah.

I'm sorry.

Yeah, I'll skip down one.

Okay.

Case number 172.25.

Final respondents beach.

Eats enterprises.

What our name?

LSC at 395 Mandalay Avenue in violation of the code for prohibited signage and issue an order with a compliance deadline and fine if the compliance is not met.

Anyone here to speak on that case?

No.

Okay.

Inspector, you have the floor.

All right, Stephen Burkard.

The case is in compliance as of today, and I'm asking for declarational violation.

Please.

May I have a motion on the declaration?

I move to find the respondent was in violation of the code as referred to in the affidavit in this case.

The violation was corrected prior to today's hearing, and to enter an order that no fine be imposed.

If the respondent repeats the violation, the board may order a fine of up to $500 for each day the violation continues to exist.

May I have a second?

Second.

All in favor?

Motion carried.

Next case.

I'll make sure I'm on the right case.

Okay.

312, 311.

Case number 173.25.

The respondents Palmer, Charles E.

Jr., Trey Palmer, Charles E.

Jr.

Rev Trust, Joseph Pilara, Vivian Pilara, Peter Pilara, and Melissa Arnett at 431 Mandalay Avenue in violation or prohibited signage and issue an order with a compla compliance deadline and fine if compliance is not met.

Anyone here to speak on that case?

Obviously not.

Mr.

Burkhart, you have the floor.

Stephen Burkhart.

Uh the case uh 173-25 uh was in violation, and as of today is in compliance, so I'm asking the board for declaration of violation.

And may I have a motion on the declaration?

I move to find the respondent was in violation of the code as referred to in the affidavit in this case.

The violation was corrected prior to today's hearing, and to enter an order that no fine be imposed.

If the respondent repeats the violation, the board may order a fine of up to 500 for each day.

The violation continues to exist.

Second.

Second.

All in favor.

Aye.

Aye.

Motion carried.

Next case.25.

Respondents Pelican Walk Plaza, LLC at 483 Mandalay Avenue in violation of code for prohibitive signage and issue an order with a compliance deadline and find if the compliance does not met.

Mr.

Burkoff, again, you have a vote.

Stephen Burkhardt.

Is in compliance as of today.

So I'm asking the board for declaration or violation.

And may I have a motion on the declaration?

I'm moved to find the respondent was in violation of the code as referred to in the affidavit in this case.

The violation was corrected prior to today's hearing and to enter an order that no fine be imposed.

If the respondent repeats the violation, the board may order a fine of up to 500 for each day the violation continues to exist.

Any second second?

All in favor?

Aye.

Motion carried.

Thank you very much.

Thank you, Ms.

Burkhart.

Next case.

Okay.

And we're going down to wow, that's continued.

Case number 181.25.

No.

3.16.

Oh, sorry.

My mistake.

Yes, continue.

Yeah.

Yeah, we're skipping right down to 181.25.

You're right.

Find respondents, Andrew.

Smoker.

Smoker at 2901.

There he is.

And you're just in time to read this.

We're on 3.19.

Oh, you on me read for you?

So you catch up.

Okay.

3.19.

All right.

Next case up on the docket is 3.19, case number 18125.

Fine respondents, Andrew Smokler at 2901 Brigadier and Drive in violation of code for exterior surfaces and clean roof and issue an order with the compliance deadline and fine and fine if compliance is not met.

Is there anyone here to speak on this?

We come forward, sir.

He's not sworn in there.

Yes, he was sworn in.

Were you sworn in, sir?

I don't believe so.

He was just sitting there.

Yeah.

I don't believe Greg has your mail.

Okay.

Good afternoon, Mr.

Smoker.

Do you admit or deny the violation?

Admit.

Admitted?

Okay, will you have a seat right there?

Can I have a first motion, please?

I may definitely respond in violation of the code as referred to in the appetite in this case.

Second.

All in favor?

Aye.

Aye.

All opposed.

Good afternoon, board.

Jared Daniel Senior, Code Inspectors.

This is about address 2901, Brigadoon Drive.

This one violation for a uh closed section 3-1502.

B for exterior surfaces.

The notice will a violation was sent out on uh 41525 with a compliance date of 521 25, and the certified mail was received signed on 42925.

This is on the day of the first initial inspection, just the top mold and mill do whatever.

Uh this was after the compliance date.

Same, it's still in the same state.

And this was this morning, still in the same state.

Compliance can be met for exterior surfaces by replacing any defective structure and decorative elements of any building walls and ensure all external surfaces are free of mildew, rust, loose materials, and fading slash pill and paint.

Uh requesting compliance on or before February 1st, 2026, or a fine of one 150 dollars per day per violation if compliance is not met.

Yes.

Have you been in conversation with the elder?

Uh I saw the spoke with him on site before, and he insured me that he was working on it.

Uh it was some more things to the unit that were fixed, but this was just the only thing that's that's left to be done.

Okay.

Uh, what else did you see there that has been fixed?

That has been fixed.

Yeah.

Oh, they painted he pressure washed the whole unit.

It was more mold and mill do on the rest of the uh unit that he did clear up.

And uh he insured me that it was he couldn't reach it with the pressure washer, so he was supposed to be getting going further to try to get out there and get that all cleaned up.

Gotcha.

Okay, thank you.

Mr.

Snooker.

So how's the progress going on this property?

Um, I'm making progress.

Uh originally there was also like debris on the roof.

Um I had the HOA trim more of the tree line because mine is an end unit and it has a ton of uh tree branches that get old, whatever dried out and they fall on the roof, they fall on uh the front of me uh when I come out of my home, which is unsafe for me.

Um but they did do that, they did that.

Um there was also uh damage to my posts, which I uh cockered, is that the right word?

Cockered and repainted.

I also had a handyman come over and do some siding on the back between the two uh um AC units and painted the closest paint that we could.

Um I've had pressure washer on the side of that mildew that you just saw.

Um it removed most of it, but unfortunately, due to the Florida heat and whatever or not, it has grown back.

I've been also pressure washing it quite often.

I tried to get on the roof myself, but unfortunately uh my ladders aren't big enough.

I don't have any family or associates that I can get larger ladders to, but I will uh remedy that uh with either a professional company or buy just a new ladder myself because of the companies that I have asked to help me.

Uh they won't even speak with me without getting money up front first, which I think is a little bit uh ridiculous.

But I have every intention of fixing it by whatever date because even though it's in the back and it's not being seen by anyone, it's still part of my responsibility as part of my home and want my home to be a good reflection of the community.

Very good.

Sounds like you're taking care of a lot of stuff.

I'm trying.

Um, February 1st is going to be plenty of time for you to get the rest of everything compliance.

Yes.

Um, do you have any questions for a second motion?

Thank you, sir.

I move to enter an order requiring the respondent to correct the violations on or before February 1st, 2026.

If the respondent does not comply by that date, the board may order a fine of 150 dollars per day for violation for each day.

Each violation continues to exist.

If fines and fees remain unpaid three months after such lien is filed, the city's authorized to pull flows, collector settles such lien.

Second.

All in favor?

Aye.

All opposed.

All right, motion carries.

Uh next case is 3.21 on our agenda case number 183-25, five and respondents.

Elizabeth Anderson at 200 Leeward Island in violation of code for unsafe building and work and issue order with the compliance deadline and fine if compliance is not met.

Is there anyone here to speak on this?

Yes, she hasn't been.

Have you been sworn in, ma'am?

No, no.

We'll get you sworn in real quick and then we'll get to it.

If you'll just raise your hand.

Do you swear farms tell the tree throughout your entire test?

We will thank you.

She needs to state her name.

Miss Anderson, will you come up to the podium, please?

Will you state your name?

I gotta ask I got a couple questions to ask you.

Oh, Liz Anderson.

Uh can you state your name and address for our clerk?

Okay, it's Elizabeth Anderson, 200 Leeward Island.

Miss Anderson, do you admit or denied the violation today?

Admit to the violation.

Okay, if you want to have a seat right there, we'll we'll have the city present her case and then I'll get right back to you.

Sit where can you move that rope for her so she don't have to go all the way with that?

Thank you.

Miss Anderson.

Ms.

Anderson, you can just go right through there, huh?

You can just turn around and go right through there so you don't have to walk all the way around.

You keep telling me I'm doing we've spent a lot of time together.

All right, uh Inspector Larson, we have the floor.

Thank you.

Um my name is James Larson, building inspector.

This is case number 183-25, 200 Leeward Island.

Section.

We have one violation, Section 3-1502, property maintenance requirements, minimum building code requirements.

All buildings shall be maintained in accordance with the Florida Building Code, Fire Prevention Code, International Maintenance Code, Section 3-1503, nuisance nuisances, the existence of any of the following specific uh buildings which are abandoned, boarded up for a period of six months, partially destroyed, left of a period of three months, a state of partial construction, provided any unfinished building or structure which has been under construction six months or more shall be deemed and presumed to have been left for unreasonably long period of time.

Notice of violation 1016, 2024.

So it's over a year, 27 days after received a notice as a compliance date.

Certified mail was returned signed on October 25th, 2024.

The property was posted October 16, 2025.

No hearing posted 1016 25 notice of hearing.

Here you'll see.

Yes, sir.

Oh wow.

There's her car in the garage.

at 200 leeward uh these are pictures of the structure um the building uh was on fire after the hurricane uh flooding was the fire during the hurricane yes sir oh wow and there's her car in the garage yes and this is what it looked like yesterday uh she did have it cleaned up real well as you can see but uh it's still in violation as it stands for compliance to be met have a license contract or obtain and complete required permitting to elevate the structure according to design flood elevation or for compliance to demo complete demolition of the structure um obtain and complete the permit by March 18th 2026 we're asking the board to authorize the city of clearwater to enter onto the property to correct the violations by any means necessary and any reasonable cost to be applied as liens against the property after three months from the recording date of such a lien if the fines and fees remain unpaid the city attorney's office is authorized to foreclose collect or settle such lien using any legal or equitable remedies under state law under the law and that's pretty much where we stand.

Now when you when the the city says by any and all means does that mean even the limit demolition of the property that's of the structure yes sure okay well how do you determine that as far as that well the the the situation because of the the flood and the the hurricane um the FEMA rules apply I know they have to be elevated yes for yeah so there's no fixing this one way or the other it's my it's my opinion this that no there's there's um short of I mean I've seen in the past where they will leave some of this up and then build on top of it but as as the way it stands now it's not Mr.

Chairman I'd like to hear Bob's up too based on my experience with the the FEMA rules if a property is damaged in excess of 50% of its actual value at the time of a storm um caught and repair cost exceed that 50% value then the entire structure has to be brought up to code including elevating the structure if it's below the base what they call the base flood elevation and so based on what I see here and knowing the location of it there's when you have a slab residence there's no raising feasible way to lift that slab it's it's much the the economical route is the the typically the property would get demolished and then a new structure built that is at an elevation that complies with the FEMA rules.

That what that means in our world is that the only feasible economical route on this thing is that it all he comes down thank you more do you have any other questions for inspector a recommended fine just remember um is this a this isn't a nuisance is it no it'd be a lane well it's unstable building so what would you how what would be the daily Mr.

Chair did I mean this they we have cited to the note nuisance code provisions um but we have not brought it through the um expedited uh nuisance abatement procedures this is as you can see from the timeline this is something that um we've been extending multiple times trying to um work with the property owner um and I'll just add that you know with regard to the um the FEMA rules and that sort of thing when when someone applies for a permit uh to repair something that's been damaged um by a storm that the the floodplain administrator for the city will make a determination on the on the 50 percent rule um whether or not the repair would exceed that that 50 percent rule as as the board member was explaining um that comes at the time that they apply for the permit when they apply for the permit and so there there would there could be a substantial damage determination or a substantial repair determination made through that permitting process um that decision is then appealable up to the community development board if the person disagrees with that decision I'm not familiar with the with the specific details for this the if the I don't know if the building department won wants to chime in on that but um you know they do have uh the building official there the floodplain administrator I should say can make that determination of substantial damage essentially what we're asking for here is just the the uh authorization to go and demolish it if if it's not done within a certain time the other thing I would add to that is that um I'm not sure if the if the property owner can explain whether or not the property's homesteaded or not um it is on the city cannot foreclose on a homesteaded property so I did um just make that clear uh we wouldn't we would never uh even attempt to do so it's it's expressly prohibited um for a uh for a lien on in this type of situation um you know for demolition we we would go through a procurement process we would um get get quotes from demolition contractors um and and engage that if if this was all authorized and then um the work would be done um

floodplain administrator I should say can make that determination of substantial damage essentially what we're asking for here is just the the uh authorization to go and demolish it if if it's not done within a certain time the other thing I would add to that is that um I'm not sure if the if the property owner can explain whether or not the property's homesteaded or not um it is okay the city cannot foreclose on a homesteaded property so I did um just make that clear uh we wouldn't we would never uh even attempt to do so it's it's expressly prohibited um for a uh for a lien on in this type of situation um you know for demolition we we would go through a procurement process we would um get get quotes from demolition contractors um and and engage that if if this was all authorized and then um the work would be done um the the the liens that would go against the property I know in talking with the clerk in other cases we have um worked out payment plans and things over time that that's something that we would be open to we understand we understand the hardship of of the situation so I just want to make all that clear on the record um before we we move on okay um thank you counsel thank you miss anderson can you come back up please okay wait are you okay do you need you need some water take your time take your time I'm gonna drop yet we're very sorry for your loss yes we are we all understand I have a lawsuit you know it's hard do you plan on on pulling permits to try to get this I would love to have my house back and you know I was making Christmas cookies no I don't know I'm planning but I call I I had one builder constructor and I looked on on Zoom or whatever it is and they said he was unreputable so I have to be very careful.

Is your homeowner's insurance helping you my homeowner your insurance are they helping?

I had no insurance I my mother died and I took care of her and just and uh just a year before I stopped the insurance because they wanted two thousand a month because of the water and water pump so I stopped the insurance so as of right now you're you're basically the only thing that you know is the lawyer in that high end case because the car when I uh when during the hurricane I opened the garage tour and the whole house blew up and the neighbors mad because the pool was a mess that was my fault but he could should have been worried that house could have blown him up and his house too thank god it didn't blow anybody neighbor on either side you know as long as it was mine that was the only luck I had where are you living now Mr.

Anderson last yesterday I was going in a motel but my dog knows how to press the electric button and she didn't want any dogs and he's going in the motel ahead of me said get out in orange blossom he was polish yeah I know that motel he knows how to press he figured how to press the button the back of the car.

Okay.

But sometimes I say in the car sometimes I I used to go a FEMA Fairfield Hotel that was lovely but you know it was only for duration.

Yeah.

Miss Anderson do you have uh any any plans in place or any idea how you're gonna deal with the property or what you're gonna do.

Well I I had uh Kevin uh demolish her because the city wanted 2500 to demolish it he said he could do it for six and the pool so I I'm calling a lot of people I I didn't know anything for six months Hyundai said they were gonna give me money and because of the car was on a safety recall and I took it to Fitzgerald and they told me it was fine that I could take it put it anywhere in the car anywhere and the fire inspector said the brakes they didn't replace the brakes ejected and that's why it blew up do you own the property my mother gave me two okay good oh that's good well in the end in the end it will be yeah I mean well that's okay it's just part of life Miss Anderson we understand it's it's all be okay everything's okay it is so you're in the process of talking with demolition trying to find demolition contractor and sometimes I ask contractors because a lot of contractors said they could fix the my neighbor said there's four walls you can do something but the city you know they say this now they gotta have a pillar and they have cast iron pipes and I can't you know how it's all yeah yeah they they've really tightened tighten the grip down there on the islands and you know because of you know because of I've been there 57 years it was different codes now yeah yeah you know so you know do you think that you're they've got a March 18th deadline on this I mean do you think that you by March 18th you're gonna possibly be able to oh you don't call anymore he is the you know a keep calling you know you can get somebody out there and maybe you know look at it you you know make a decision one way there's what we're gonna do today uh is just go ahead with go ahead with our procedure and you have until you'll have until the March of the the twenty sixth or sixth eighteenth

So you know do you think that you're they've got a March 18th deadline on this.

I mean, do you think that you by March 18th you're gonna possibly be able to do that?

Oh, you don't call anymore.

He is the key call.

You know, you can get somebody out there and maybe you know look at it, you you know, make a decision one way or there.

Because what we're gonna do today uh is just go ahead with go ahead with our procedure, and you have until you'll have until the March of the 26th or 6th, 18th.

So I can cry all through Christmas in the burned out house.

You can all come for a Christmas party.

We can you come Christmas in my house if you want to.

Um but we're just gonna we're gonna go ahead and go through our order, and then you'll you'll have until March the 18th.

It's okay.

It's it's it's okay.

You know, stuff happens to the best other sign, and you had no problem, you had no control over this.

Yeah, but I did have control in the beginning.

I thought this last night, I should have sold that right away.

But I uh you know, I think my mother dying and being here for so long.

I understand.

Well, you can still sell the property after after it's uh comes back into uh compliance.

Yeah, that's why I say in the end you own it, it's gonna help you.

It's gonna help you really well.

I mean, I know what can I do?

Bill, if uh if Hyunder doesn't give me any money, I'll live in there in a tent.

The land you you the land's worth the land's worth of it, you know, down there on the island.

That just that land with no building, it's a flat piece of dirt, yeah, is worth a lot of money.

That's gonna be in your own.

And that's gonna be in your favor, yeah.

You know, if I make it, if I'll you will complete fine.

You you're going you're gonna come out of this and you're gonna be just fine.

I'm sorry, I'm not gonna do it.

Oh, that's okay.

It's all right.

So um, yeah, like I said, we're gonna go ahead and go through our orders and then and then you know you'll you'll have it till March the 18th.

You know, keep calling some people, maybe get some fruit builders out there and see, you know, just get some ideas, you know, before you make the decision to set.

Okay.

I just got new glasses, so I don't I feel like a drunk, you know.

I can see is all so good.

I'm actually uglier than I really look.

So your new glasses are probably helpful.

So cheap.

Okay.

All right.

Well, thank you, Miss Anderson.

We we know you're overwhelmed.

Yeah, but don't let it consume you.

Okay.

All right.

Happy holidays, guys.

You too, Miss Anderson.

Can I get a I got a first motion on this, right?

We didn't.

I don't think we did.

I don't think so.

No, we didn't get a fine.

Yeah, there is that first.

Can I get a first motion on this?

Is this a nuisance abatement?

No, no, it's a regular case.

No, it's not a nuisance.

That's what the I moved to find the respondent in violation of the code is referred to in the affidavit in this case.

Oh, second.

All in favor?

Aye.

All opposed?

First motion carries.

Can we get a second motion?

I move to enter an order requiring the respondent to correct the violations on or before March 18th, 2026.

If the respondent does not comply by that date, the board may order a fine of is it 150?

No, there was no right motion.

I think there's a lot of build abatement authority motion.

Oh, so with the abatement motion being appropriate, uh didn't ask for the abatement.

Is that what you want?

We asked for the I mean, essentially it's the same um remedy that we are requesting where the city's requesting if the uh deadline is not met, as the city be authorized to enter um the property and correct the violation.

All right, so that would be under the unsafe building.

But in that language is the word foreclosed, and we've rendered a few.

Well, you can't for I mean you could say it, but it doesn't matter because they can't.

So you can put the land.

I mean, if it suddenly isn't homesteaded, then they could.

All right.

So we just read the order as so right.

And that would be the opportunity.

So it's a question of what the city's able to do.

Skip the skip the fine.

That would be the just let it play out right.

We're not we're not seeking any kind of fine.

We're just we're like I said, we would if the deadline was not met, then we would discuss as as a city staff what the next step would be, and and we would um you know hire a contractor through our procurement, and um we go uh go demolish the building pursuit to the court's authorization with regard to the homestead issue.

Uh, we would never foreclose on the homestead property, but as the attorney said, if the property changed ownership and lost its homestead status, then we we would at that time could that could be a potential means to collect whatever expenses the city incurred.

Okay, okay.

So I thought this was zero in the payment.

Well, I won't even read that or I'll just skip it.

No, it wasn't a new student's abatement.

Right.

We're on an unsafe building.

All right, all right.

I move to enter an order requiring the respondent to correct the violations on or before March 18th, 2026.

If the respondent does not comply by that date, the city may take all reasonable actions, including entry onto the property to bring a property in the compliance and charge the respondent with all cost, which will become a lien on the property.

It cost fines and fees remain unpaid three months after such lien is filed.

The city's authorized propose, collect or settle such lien.

Second.

All in favor?

Aye.

All opposed?

Second motion carries.

All right, next, Miss Anderson.

Oh, I think you guys have a move.

You too, dear.

Thank you.

Miss Anderson.

Are you available to stay till the end of the meeting?

Okay.

Um, our next case is going to be 323-22 on our agenda case 184-25.

Find respondents.

William R.

Black at 2390 Willow Street Trail in violation of code for unsafe building and issue in order to compliance deadline and fine if compliance is not met.

Is there anyone here to speak on that case?

No.

Yes.

Well, I can go ahead with our first motion.

Oh, okay.

Hold on.

Let's what this wait a second.

Is I'm sorry, are we on 3.22?

3.22, yes.

I come here.

Stand up.

Oh, it started before I forget.

I think it's a good one.

Everything was running smooth until I walked in pretty much.

I think it was very much.

Thank you.

Uh item 3.22 will be continued to January.

Okay.

Uh sorry about that.

Case number 184-225 will be continued until our January meeting.

Okay, 3.23 on our agenda has been withdrawn.

Case 3.24 on the agenda.

Case number 186-25.

Find respondents level 13 asset management LLC at 534 South Keystone Avenue in violation of code for permits and issue an order with the compliance deadline and fine if compliance is not met.

Is there anyone here to speak on that case?

No?

Inspector Reese, you have the floor.

Good afternoon, Code Board.

I'm Inspector Catherine Reese, also known as Cat Reese.

Might as well put that on record now.

Um for case number 18625.

Um this is for what violations for permits required section 4-2038.a dot one.

Specifically, this is for an installation of new posts on the deck and the railing replacement.

First notice was sent to April 10th, 2025, and my final notice was sent May 19th, 2025 with a compliance date on the original compliance date of May 19, 2025.

I posted to the property on December 5th this year for the hearing.

This is just to give you an idea of where the location is.

So it would be south of Crestlake Park, uh just east of Lake Drive.

And it's a picture of the physical posting for the hearing.

Well and this started as I started as on a housing case for this property.

Um so I can testify that deck was not like that during my housing inspection.

I've had no communication with the property owners ever.

Um they just went about to try to fix, I guess, what they could, but um again on my housing, it did state that they meet required permits for such work.

And that was my picture as of today.

Compliance could be met by obtaining an issue permit and completing said permit.

Requesting compliance on or before January 19th, 2026 to obtain an issue permit, and six months from issue issuance date to complete said permit.

If the violation continues to exist, impose a fine of 150 dollars per day each day the violation continues to exist.

That's it.

And you had no communication at all when none at all.

I've seen a car there, so someone living there, yeah.

You think it's tenants?

I've I've talked to tenants on the property, but never the property owners.

Okay.

Cat when was your compliance date?

The original was May 19th.

So it's been a while.

Right.

No, not the original January 16th.

January 16th.

Oh, January.

Uh yes, but I picked the yeah, so January 16th, I think.

Okay, I'm January.

19th, yes, because I went to the next business open business day.

Gotcha.

From a month from today, but not counting the weekend.

Do you have any questions for the inspector?

Go ahead.

So there's there's no permit of any uh record of any kind for the deck work that was built.

No, sir.

Okay.

And no communication from the owner whatsoever?

No.

Okay.

Did they uh sign for the uh certified mail?

Do you know?

No, that is why I posted on the property.

Uh I also posted my notices on the property as well.

No communication whatsoever then.

Okay.

All right.

Can you look on the property records to see where the owners are at?

Are they around here or it's an LLC?

Oh, so yeah.

And I believe their address is in Ocala, if I'm not mistaken, just off memory writing so many notices.

No SRC is ever live here.

No properties.

So yeah, board board, do you have any uh other questions for inspector?

No.

Can I have a first motion?

Mr.

Chairman, I move to find the respondent in violation of the code as referred to in the app to debate in this case.

Second.

All in favor?

Aye.

All opposed.

First motion carries.

Can I get a second?

I move to end an order requiring the respondent to correct the violence.

It's owner before January the 19th, 2026.

If the respondent does not comply by the date, the board vote order a fine of 150 dollars per day per violation for each day each violation continues to exist.

It finds a fees to remain unpaid three months after such lane is filed.

The city is authorized to foreclose, collect, or settle such lane.

Second.

All in favor?

Aye.

All opposed?

Second motion carries.

All right.

Next case 3.25, case number 187-25 for underneath Vicky Lynn Bishop at 1028 Iroquois Street in violation of code for permits and issue an order with the compliance deadline and fine if compliance is not met.

Is there anyone here to speak on that case?

No.

Inspector Reese, you have the floor.

Right.

Inspector Cat Reese, this is in reference to 1028 Iroquois Street, case number 187-25.

And this also will be for one violation, section 4-203.a dot one uh for permits required.

No person shall commence any construction, demolition, modification, or renovation of a building or structure without first obtaining a building permit specifically for the installation of the pool.

Yeah.

This is a old case that I have taken over from a previous inspector.

So the beginning, their first notice of violation was sent September 28th of 2020.

With my final notice that was sent June 3rd of 2025.

Their original compliance date was October 13th of 2020.

Um and I did have to post to the uh the hearing for the notice of hearing on December 5th.

Um, this is located on Iroquois Street, which is just east of Fort Harrison.

Um just south of Calumet Street, more common street.

Um that is a picture of the property and my posting on December 5th.

Uh this is a Google Earth image of said pool.

And just the street view from January 10th of 2019.

And then another uh sorry, aerial view of February 23rd of 2025.

I have had contact with Miss Bishop.

Um however, given the time that you know, um how long this has been going on and reading through the notes from the previous inspector saying that you're gonna get something done, and it's been quite some time.

I did extend her twice.

Um she does have a contractor who put in for the pool permit, however, he has not met the conditions on it, and I did make it clear to the contractor without the permit being issued prior to code board, I would still have to continue on with the case so that we can ensure that we get an issued permit and have final inspections on this pool.

So that's why we're here today.

Um these are the conditions that need to be met.

Um so uh the contractor, the narrative that they put into the the permit does not match what's what the permit technicians are seeing in you know for the permit.

So it's they need to fix that as well, and then they'll be able to get an issue permit.

So compliance can be met by obtaining and completing a permit or removing the pool.

Request compliance on or before January 19th to obtain an issued permit and six months from issue date to complete said permit.

If the violation continues to exist, impose a fine of 150 dollars per day each day the violation continues to exist.

And just to add, Miss Bishop is aware that if the contractor didn't get this done, that I would be presenting it at cook work.

I surprised she's not here.

So this is five years.

It's very permit.

Yes.

That's that's unreasonable.

I mean, that's that's like well it did it, did it I'm I'm curious as to why the gap just for any particular reason, but for the great question.

I really I can't speak on previous inspectors.

I know for me going forward, I want to stick to a reasonable timeline, so we don't have very old cases like this coming before the board without a reasonable explanation as to why I I assure you that won't happen on my area.

Nobody's holding you responsible for we're right.

I know.

I just wish I had answers for you, but for that, but I don't when was the original permit.

In 2020.

I don't think we've ever heard one that long.

Is it are you allowed to like permits go for five years?

Oh no, so the permit has that was um sorry, let me go back for you so that way you could I know what you mean now.

That might have been just a violation.

There was no permit.

Right.

So the permit itself was applied for on December 11th.

Of this year, yes.

So four days ago.

So I'm confident, even with us me presenting it here that the the contract the contractor advised me, I'll have it done before code board so you can get it withdrawn, but here we are.

So I just can't take people's word for it, especially when it comes to a permit and a pool, you know.

We need to ensure final inspections because it was a stock work order.

But even so the violations have been there five years.

Yes.

And there is no statute of limitations, Mr.

Chair.

We there is a an attorney general's opinion that's recognizes that there is no specific statute of limitations applicable to code uh ordinance, city ordinance violations, and then get given the fact that it uh unpermitted um construction is it is an ongoing thing.

Um you're gonna see uh as Ms.

Reese has taken over some cases that kind of got stale over um just staff staffing issues.

I I suppose that um you you will see some of these as she's picking up the the banner for them, but we've we've looked at them, we've talked through it.

Um there it's our position that there the statute of limitations um does not apply for for these types of issues violations each and every day.

You've heard that phrase each and every day the violation exists, is um often treated as a new violation itself.

So we are talking through some of this, trying to figure out the best way there that with permits that have been applied and were not properly closed out or or were um expired, and then properties are sold to uh bona five purchasers with those um with those issues.

The building code statute um lays out a process that allows the building department to close out some of those expired permits, um, but that's only if you know there was kind of a permit in process from a previous owner, and then you've got an arms like buyer who kind of bought into something that they didn't know they were getting.

That's kind of a different situation from completely unpermitted or altogether.

Um I hope that answers some of your questions.

But you you the board will likely see some more of these in the in the coming days, and we're happy to to talk through some of that with you.

And the city's not asking like pro act uh retroactive back to whatever date that was for.

2020, whatever the violation for being able to do that.

Uh now there is a uh uh sort of a statute of limitations in the code enforcement chapter with regard to repeat violations because there's a five-year time limit to where you can apply a repeat status, but outside of that, we're not we would not be trying to backdate any of these things.

We're just trying to clean up some of the records and move these folks forward.

All right, no worries.

I have a question.

Good.

Yeah, go ahead, Mr.

That looks like an above-ground pool.

All right.

Um I know for uh for an in-ground pool, and this this not necessarily part of our thing here, but is is uh is the security fence that's typically required.

Is that any part of this?

That's a good question.

Yeah, and the study around the pool, you have to have security fence.

Right, but what we are here for today is for just specifically for the permit for the pool being installed.

Give her time, give her time.

They'll have to comply with today's code because they have not, even though it was installed back then, they had they didn't apply for a permit.

So they'll come in, they'll apply for a permit, and then it'll be reviewed under the applicable codes that today.

And it just somehow never made it to us until now since back then.

Right.

I can't speak to the case.

No, I know.

I'm in the uh blank statement.

Blanket statement, you know, that I can't believe we haven't seen this this come before us before at five years.

Normally we try to keep things on a timeline.

We have a we have you know standards operating procedures that we apply in terms of time frames, but we're not there's no um legal requirement that we initiate a case within a certain time.

The city always has discretion, and and quite often we do uh work with people.

I think in this in these situations that Miss Reese is taking over, some of that has been kind of some staffing issues that we've had.

Yeah, no worries.

Ms.

Reese, have you actually seen the pool yourself?

No, but I have spoken with her and I have the emails that there's no denial of the pool.

No, the reason I'm asking you that is if you had seen it, you would have seen if there's a security fence around it.

But you have a thing.

Correct.

Maybe because that's a concern regardless when it comes back up.

It still needs to be a security fence around it.

Yes.

Well, and for Daniel's uh point, I mean it's um I'm sorry, Jerry Jared.

Um it's it's got to comply with current code, and if the current code specifies the fence, then in order to get it past inspection, it'll have to if it will be there.

So that'll be okay.

The process will handle it.

Hopefully, this will be uh I hope so after a five year this will move the the the contractor along to uh to to get the permits you know cleared out.

Um more questions for Inspector Reese on this case.

No can I have a first motion?

I move to find the respondent in violation of the code is referred to in the affidavit in this case.

Second.

All in favor?

Aye.

All opposed?

First motion carries.

I moved down in an order requiring the respondent to correct or violations on or before January 19th, 2026.

If the respondent does not comply by that date, the board may order a fine of 150 dollars per day for violation for each day, each violation continues to exist.

If fines and fees remain unpaid three months after such lien is filed, the city is authorized to foreclose, collect, or settle such lien.

Second.

All in favor?

All right, second motion carries.

Next case is 3.26 on our agenda case 188-25.

Incorporated at 1039 West Avenue in violation of code for permits, an issue in order with the compliance deadline and fine if compliance is not met.

Is there anyone here to speak on that case?

No, Inspector Reese, you have the floor.

Okay, Inspector Reese.

Um, this is a reference to 1039 West Avenue, uh, case number 18825.

Uh this one violation here again for permits required section 4-203.a dot one, specifically for an installation of a shed that is over a hundred square feet that is on the property.

The original notice was sent August 20th of 2024.

My final notice was sent May 13th of 2025.

The original compliance date was September 10th of 2024.

Um here is the physical posting of the notice for hearing on December 5th.

And this is the shed um that is in question uh that requires the permit at the time of inspection.

There are they do have extension cords running um along across the back of the yard um into the shed there, as well as on the other side.

That that's the side that you see from street view.

And that is a street view.

Wow, that's a tiny home, ain't that somebody's living there?

That's a barn.

It came in as is someone who's living there, but we have to be able to uh prove that.

So with this is common sense to somebody's living there.

Oh, yeah.

Yeah.

See, they got that, they even got the volunteer out front, the the lazy boy out there, you know, to sit back at night and watch the mosquito.

Yes, and that was my um pictures from today.

Um just for good measure.

Um, I did go ahead and take uh measurements of the shed.

Uh so it looks like from side to side it's going uh it's 10 10 feet over 10 feet on one side.

Oh, sorry.

10 feet long yeah, and 15 on the other.

So it's over 100 square feet, that's the point.

Yeah, and 150 feet 150 square feet.

Right.

Compliance can be met by obtaining an issue permit and completing said permit.

We're pressing compliance on or before January 19th, 2026 to obtain a permit and six months from issuing date issuance of permit to complete said for said permit.

If the violation continues to exist, impose a fine of 150 per day each day that it exists.

Any questions?

Yeah.

Um I noticed from the street view photo that it looked like this thing was like two or three feet from the fence.

It is I'm assuming part of this may be a setback issue.

It appears that would it will be a setback issue.

Um, as well as it appears that the structure is in front of the primary structure.

I'll go back to that.

Um, but with again with the process of getting a permit and having proper documentation that will resolve their their or actually give them their options of what they need to do.

Uh let me go back to it.

Uh so I you got maybe my other angle.

There we go.

So you could see this is the primary structure here.

Yeah.

Uh and it's very much past you know before that.

Yeah.

Okay.

Have you been in contact with the owner?

Absolutely no contact, just with the tenants of the primary structure.

Gotcha.

Okay.

I've attempted contact knocking on the door of the shed, but I've never had any any of the anybody open it.

What did the tenants say about it?

They know better.

Um I mean, have they said anyone's living in it?

Or no?

Well, they have, but in order for that to even apply, they would have to be willing to come testify.

Right.

Which a lot of people are are very afraid to do that.

They their housing situations, whatever that may be, are are not willing to do that.

So that is my reasoning for not going forward with an ADU.

Okay.

Yeah.

Okay.

You still have to think about safety if something would happen if somebody was actually living in there and something did happen, you know.

Heaven forbid that you know about this one.

We see that on the news, right?

Sure.

I'm ready.

Okay, any other questions, board?

Inspector Reese.

All right, can I get a first motion on this?

Mr.

Chairman, I move to find the respondent in violation of the code as referred to in the appetite in this case.

Second.

All in favor?

Aye.

All opposed.

First motion carries.

We can get a second.

I move to enter an order requiring the respondent to correct the violence on or before January the 19th, 2026.

If the respondent does not comply by that date, the board may order a fine of 150 dollars per day per violation for each day east violation continues to exist.

If files and fees remain unpaid three months after such lane is filed, the city is authorized to foreclose, collect or settle such lane.

Second.

All in favor?

Aye.

All opposed?

Second motion carries.

All right.

Uh 3.27 on our agenda has been withdrawn.

3.28 has been continued to our February meeting.

Uh 3.29 on our agenda case 191-25.

Find respondent Richard and Nicole Pendleton at 3268 San Mateo Street in violation of code for permits and issue an order with compliance and fines if in compliance if fine if compliance is not met.

Is there anyone here to speak on that case?

We come forward, sir.

Okay.

If you give me a moment to speak to the cooler, okay.

There's no score in the case.

Nobody's sworn.

That's what I'm saying.

So if we're using it, yeah.

Oh, the three of them.

It's a mass one leave.

Tell you about it.

Three minutes.

Okay.

For a second, I was happy because the shed was your shed.

When I seen the red pop up, I was like, that's Mr.

Kinney's shield.

That's what that's how we met online.

That's how that's how Mr.

McKinney would be missed.

He was out there.

You know, he was trying to shoehorn 10 pounds of stuff into a five-pound bag.

And it wasn't working.

I can argue for it.

Yeah, 31 bag.

Well, she should tell my guy.

See if it's got a sign up here.

No.

Okay.

No.

Are you uh are you ready?

All right.

Let me bring up San Mateo for you.

I'm gonna talk to you.

So the defendant here real quick, and then I'll get right back to you, Inspector.

Yep.

So will you come up here?

Um first you need to be sworn in since you didn't get here.

So you're probably telling the truth right here throughout your entire testimony.

Yes, sir.

Thank you.

Sir, will you state come up to the microphone?

Will you state your name and address for the record, please?

Richard Pendleton 3268 San Mattel Street.

Okay.

Mr.

Pendleton, do you uh admit or deny the violence?

I admit the violation.

All right.

If you'll have a seat right there, we'll get right back.

Okay.

Thank you, sir.

Can I have a first motion, please?

I'm moved to find the respondent in violation of the code as referred to in the affidavit in this case.

Second.

All in favor?

Aye.

All opposed.

First motion carries.

Uh Inspector Reese, you have the floor.

Inspector Kat Reese with the city of Clearwood.

Uh this is for case 191-25 at 3268 San Mateo Street.

The first notice of violation was sent out May 27th of 2025, and my final was sent July 8th of 2025.

Original compliance date was June 16th of 2025, and we had signed certified mail on both June 17th and 26th of 2025.

This is the uh this is for papers that were installed in the front of the property.

So these were the original.

Um again, I've taken this over from a previous inspector.

Not that old big gun.

Up until today, I had no communication.

So we have discussed.

Um he is on, you know, the property owner now knows um there are revisions because it is an owner builder permit that need to be met in order for him to get an issue permit.

So I will work with him to uh aid him as much as I can through that process to make sure his conditions are met to get an issue permit.

Okay.

Um so these are the list of the conditions that not have been met yet.

Uh this is a picture of the property today.

So compliance can be met by obtaining an issue permit and completing said permit.

Request compliance on and before January 16th.

Actually, I'm sorry.

If I could please correct that to the 19th, uh like everyone else, um 2026 to obtain an issued permit and six months from issuance of permit to complete said permit.

If the violation continues to exist, impose a fine of 150 dollars per day each day the violation continues to exist.

Um what is the permit for?

It's for the papers that we're okay.

Based on uh your review today, your knowledge of the case, is that a reasonable amount of time based on the can conditions in the case?

Is that a reasonable amount of time?

I have that the property owner, he is okay with that time.

Okay, thank you.

But do you feel it can be issued within that time frame?

Um even if it is if it isn't, if he's working through that process, I have the discretion to give him more time, and I gladly would do so.

As long as I have communication from someone, I'm always happy to help uh work, you know, work with them on the timeline.

They know take care of it.

So they the papers were installed without a firm mail.

Right, it is an after-the-fact permit.

Okay, okay, okay.

Mr.

Pendleton, would you like to come back forward?

Okay, I guess I actually she answered everything that I was gonna ask you, you know.

Come on up.

Come on up, yeah.

So you're gonna have all this taken care of by the January 16th.

Yes, I will have to try to open.

Oh, that's what we're gonna ask.

The board may have another any other questions for Mr.

Pendleton.

No, no, okay.

Okay, thank you, sir.

Thank you.

Thank you, Ms.

Can I get a uh a second motion, please?

I move to enter an order requiring the respondent to correct the violations on or before January 19th, 2026.

If the respondent does not comply by that date, the board may order a fine of 150 dollars per day per violation for each day, each violation continues to exist.

If fines and fees remain unpaid three months after such lane is filed, the city is authorized to foreclose, collect or settle such lane.

Second.

All in favor?

Aye.

All opposed?

Second motion carries.

Okay, now to old business item.

Except the affidavits of compliance for case uh 4.1 point one through 4.1 point five.

Can we get a motion?

Uh move to accept the affidavit compliance as well.

Second.

All in favor?

Aye.

All opposed?

Motion carries.

Mr.

Chair, just confirming you you you did state that item 3.30 was to be continued to January 28th.

Uh no.

Well, it's already it's already on there.

Yeah, I did not say that.

Okay, but normally he's you've got to do that.

Yeah, he's been stating for the record.

So we're the records.

We do have individuals waiting for that statement.

Yeah, I'm sorry.

That was my fault.

I skipped right over.

Continue.

Okay.

Uh item 3.30 on our agenda case number 197-25 is continued to January 28, 2026.

Okay.

Um thank you, Mr.

Chairman.

You're welcome.

Uh 4.2 on our agenda has been withdrawn.

Uh case 4.3, case number 71-25.

Accept the affidavit of non-compliance for respondents.

And S estate at 1877 Springtime Avenue for exterior services, roof maintenance, and door and window openings.

Inspector Dixon?

Yeah.

Um, this is uh mission of the property this morning.

Still has tarp on the roof, the windows are boarded up, and exterior surface issues.

So we'd ask that you accept the affidavit and non-compliance.

All right.

Any questions for inspector?

No.

Can I get a motion?

I move to accept the affidavit of non-compliance and issue an order that imposes fines and states if the fines and fees remain unpaid three months after such lien is filed.

The city is authorized to foreclose, collect, or settle such lien.

Second.

All in favor?

Aye.

All opposed.

Motion carries.

Next uh case is 4.4 on our agenda, case number 92-25.

Accept the affidavits of non-compliance with respondents.

Catherine Baisley, Patricia Croft, and Philip Lamont at 30 Island Drive for address numbers and roof maintenance.

Is there no one here for that?

No.

Inspector Cassman.

What you got for us?

Come on down.

Looks I'll certainly show you what I got.

I'm curious.

Are we presenting affidavits and non compliance if there's no one here now?

Just confirm that if it's not.

Do you guys want to see it?

Nah, we don't have to.

Well, yes, still in compliance.

Um I mean, if you want, they did put the address on the house, but they did it in a way using spray paint, and they spelled it out, and it's on the garage, and that's just not the proper way of doing the address.

All right.

Well, I guess not.

We will take your testimony as true.

And uh, can I get a first motion?

That's I move to accept the affidavit of non-compliance initial order that imposes fines and states its fines and fees remain unpaid three months after such lien is filed.

The city is authorized for close collect or settle such lien.

Second.

All in favor?

Aye.

All opposed?

Motion carries.

Okay.

All right.

Now on to uh nuisance abatement lien filings.

Case uh agenda item 6.1, case number 195-25.

Accept the nuisance abatement lien for respondents.

SJS KKS L L C at 1090 Apache Trail for lock clearing and issue in order with compliance deadline to authorize the city to mitigate the violation if compliance is not met.

There's no one here for that.

Uh Inspector Dixon, you have the floor.

Inspector Dixon, co-compliance inspector for the city of Clearwater.

This is case 198-25 for 1090 Apache Trail.

One violation here for accumulation of trash and debris.

The property is posted mid-November on the compliance date.

That's long compliance date.

Five days or ten days after that.

And uh certified mail was returned to the office on December the 15th.

It's an odd-shaped property off the Pinellas Trail, um, just south of Sunset Point near the creek.

There's uh it's a large homeless encampment back there.

There at the time of posting, there's three or four tents back there.

Man, was there anybody there when you went and took those pictures?

Uh I didn't do that.

I was uh on vacation, but uh no, I don't think there was when I took these pictures on the tent.

There were a couple people there.

Yeah, but there's uh a couple more tents moved in.

I I know the owner, I've been in contact with him.

He started cleaning it up on Sunday, I think.

So he knows there's people living there, yeah.

Yeah, so there's now there's just debris.

The tents have been removed, but there's still quite a bit of debris back there.

He's pretty confident he can get it done within these five days, but if he doesn't, I'd still like the order just in case we have to go in there and clean it up.

Yeah, so compliance will be meant for the accumulation trash and free by removing all discarded items, trash, outdoor furniture from the property and requesting compliance five days after the board renders its order.

Okay, board you have any questions for Inspector Dick.

No, uh no.

All right, can we get an order?

I move to enter an order finding the respondent in violation of code and requiring the respondent to correct the violations within five days of the board's written order.

If the respondent does not comply within the time specified, the city may take all reasonable actions, including entry onto the property to abate and maintain the nuisance and charge the respondent with the reasonable cost, which will become a lien on the property.

If cause fines and fees remain unpaid three months after such lien is filed, the city is authorized to foreclose, collect, or settle such.

Second.

All in favor?

Aye.

All opposed?

All right.

Motion carried.

Next is 6.2 on our agenda case 199-25.

Except the nuisance abatement lien for respondents Freddie Harvey and 1152 Bacon Street.

Was part of withdrawal withdrawn.

It's withdrawn.

I'm sorry.

No, you're fine.

My bad.

It's one agenda I didn't get to.

6.3 ability next.

All right.

I apologize for that.

Next on our agenda is 6.3 case number 200-25.

Accept the nuisance abatement lien for respondents.

Richard Ango at 54 Somerset Street for inoperative vehicle and issue an order with the compliance deadline and authorized the city to mitigate the violation of compliance.

No one here to speak on that.

Inspector Maddox, you have the floor.

Kevin Maddox, Code Compliance Inspector, City of Clearwater.

This case is 200 25 for 54 Somerset Street.

Nuisance abatement.

Originally I got this call from the police department.

Uh reference the vehicle, and so I went out to take care of it and some other items which have been in compliance.

This is the last remaining item.

One uh violation for code section 3-1503 B6 and operable vehicle.

I notice the violation was November 21st of this year.

Compliance date by December 1st of this year.

The green card was received signed, and it was posted.

This is the vehicle in front.

Uh the posting is on the back.

There was also a sticker in the front, and you could see it from all sides.

On the 1st of December, it remained there.

I did have contact with the owner.

He called me.

Uh it was a story of an ex-girlfriend's car that he did could not get removed, and he made a statement of just letting the city take it.

Uh compliance can be met for inoperable vehicle by ensuring all vehicles are roadworthy have inflated tires and display a current registration sticker on the license plate assigned to the vehicle.

For case 200-25 requesting compliance five days after the board renders its order.

All right, any questions, board?

No.

Can we give that a motion?

I move to enter an order requiring.

I'll give you that again.

I move to enter an order finding the respondent in violation of code and requiring the respondent to correct the violations within five days of the board's written order.

If the respondent does not comply within the time specified, the city may take all reasonable actions, including entry onto the property to abate, maintain the nuisance, and charge the respondent with reasonable cost, which will become a lien on the property.

The cost fines and fees remain unpaid three months after such lien is filed.

The city is authorized to propose, collect, or settle such lien.

Second.

All in favor?

Aye.

Aye.

All opposed?

Motion carries.

All right.

If there is nothing else before us today, board, once again, I apologize for my being late.

All right.

And uh we will be adjourned.

Thank you.