Mr. Coss presents this continued case.  The continuance was to allow the property owner to file a complaint against a contractor who did the work without a permit.  The complaint was heard before the Board of Examiners of Contractors on 2 different dates.  The permit was applied for but rejected.  Additional work would have to be done to bring properties into compliance, i.e. lighting, stormwater drainage.  At the continued complaint hearing, since the owner did not appear, the charges against the contractor were dismissed.  The contractor stepped away from the project since he fulfilled his contract, with the exception, of obtaining the permit. An agreement would have to be reached between the contractor and the owner for the additional necessary work to the Ave D site.  The site at Cedar Place was an existing parking lot but was re-striped, P &Z found in their review, that the spaces had been re-configured and this creates other requirements.  This cannot be removed but needs to be improved to the P&Z requirements to close out the case.

Staff recommends that the owner be provided 180 days to obtain a permit. Once the permit is issued, they will have the permit period to have an approved inspection.

Mr. Richard Ross appears on behalf of the Longshoremen's of St. Lucie Co. Inc., and is sworn in.  He states that he was never notified of the complaint hearing before the Contractor's Board and his need to attend. He did meet with the contractor who explained the added requirements by the City and could they come to some agreement. The contractor told Mr. Ross that the added requirements totaled roughly $10,000.00.  He hopes for a median.  He states that there was paving on both properties.  He wants to know what they did wrong?  He further states that this violation came after the work was done. He feels that he did everything correctly and was directed to do and it is still falling back on the property owner.

SM Ross asks about the notice that Mr. Ross did not receive.  Mr. Coss explains that someone named "Tia" made the complaint and the notice was sent to her.  He further states that one of the photos in evidence has the contractor's truck in it showing that the work was still happening.  SM Ross asks if Mr. Ross would be able to go back before the Board of Examiner's Contractors.  Mr. Coss explains that there has been a policy change with regard to state certified contractors, if they are such, the complaint would now have to go before the Department of Business and Professional Regulation. 

SM Ross moves to continue the cases for another month in order for Mr. Ross to seek the proper venue for his complaint.  Joseph Gilbert, owner of Precision Paving is in the audience for a different case but is asked up to the podium.  He is sworn, and verifies that they are state certified general contractors. 

City Attorney Sweeney restates the legal facts of the case.  The conflict is between the contractor and owner.  The venues to enforce each parties responsibility is different and could bring different outcomes.  He makes the same recommendation as staff for additional time for the parties to come to an agreement, or for a complaint to go to the entity in authority to hear it.

SM Ross provides a 30 day continuance of the case.

Mr. Coss presents this continued case.  The continuance was to allow the property owner to file a complaint against a contractor who did the work without a permit.  The complaint was heard before the Board of Examiners of Contractors on 2 different dates. The permit was applied for but rejected.  Additional work would have to be done to bring properties into compliance, i.e. lighting, stormwater drainage, which were not part of the contract.  Since the owner did not appear at the continued complaint hearing, the charges against the contractor were dismissed.  The contractor thus stepped away from the project since he felt that he fulfilled his contract, with the exception, of obtaining the permit. An agreement would have to be reached between the contractor and the owner for the additional necessary work. To cure the violation at 710 Ave D, the additional work of lighting, stormwater drainage, and handicap accessibility would have to be done or it could be returned to it's original condition.

SM Ross moves to continue the cases for another month in order for Mr. Ross to seek the proper venue for his complaint.  Joseph Gilbert, owner of Precision Paving is in the audience for a different case but is asked up to the podium.  He is sworn, and verifies that they are state certified general contractors. 

City Attorney Sweeney restates the legal facts of the case.  The conflict is between the contractor and owner.  The venues to enforce each parties responsibility is different and could bring different outcomes.  He makes the same recommendation as staff for additional time for the parties to come to an agreement, or for a complaint to go to the entity in authority to hear it.

SM Ross provides a 30 day continuance of the case.

Case continued to August Special Magistrate.

The owner when asked states that he understands, declining use of a translator.  Mr. Carbonell presents the facts of the case. Mr. Esquivel, the owner, is sworn in.  He responds that he is working with Precision Paving to get the permit. Mr. Joseph Gilbert, the owner of Precision Paving came forward (already sworn in from previous case), and states that he has applied for the permit.  Mr. Coss directs Mr. Gilbert to speak to the Engineering Dept. to discuss requirements of the design that he has a question about.

SM Ross finds that a violation exists and provides 60 days to obtain the permit or a fine may be assessed.

Mr.  Carbonell presents the case. He states that he spoke with the owner who updated him saying that the tenant has been removed and the property has been treated.  Further, he would like to do a reinspection of the property and see the receipt from the pest control company as proof of treatment.

Mr. Spann, son of the owner, appears and is sworn in.  He states that they attempted to have the property treated before the violation occurred but the company declined to treat because of the existence of too many sources of food in the unit.  They did treat the outside.  Once the tenant left the inside was treated, and holes were closed.  It was reinspected by Terminix and they found no rodent activity in the house but some in the attic, which they plan to treat. 

SM Ross finds that a violation exists and provides the owner 30 days to cure the violation or fees may begin to accumulate.

Owner not present.  Special Magistrate provides 60 days to obtain a permit or fines may accrue.

Case pulled from the agenda.  Property reinspected by Inspector and deck was removed.

Owner not present.  Special Magistrate provides 180 days to obtain a permit or fines may accrue.

Inspector Carbonell presents the facts of the case. Gloria Morales, representing the owner, is sworn in.  She states that they are meeting with an electrician the same day to cure the violation and would like an extension. She also makes a correction to the violation - the unit at 2801 is Unit 3 not Unit 4.

SM Ross finds that a violation exists and provides 30 days to get permitting or a fine may begin to accumulate.

Case pulled from the agenda.  The property has a new owner.

Owner not present.  Special Magistrate provides 60 days to obtain a permit or fines may accrue.

Inspector Carbonell presents the facts of the case. Mr. Green is present and states that he has started to try to make some of the repairs. When asked he states that he understands that some work may require permits and he will get a permit when necessary.

SM Ross finds that a violation exists and provides the owner 30 days to obtain a permit or fines may begin to accumulate.

Owner not present.  Special Magistrate provides 60 days to obtain a permit or fines may accrue.

Inspector Carbonell presents the facts of the case. Mr. Raphael was sworn in.  He states that he has already called for pest control - he said that the pest control company said that they can treat but it has to without the tenants there.  The tenants are present.  He states that he can fix the window. He evicted the tenant and will finish everything when they are gone.

Natasha Williamson, the tenant is sworn in.  She states that a year after they moved in they started to see rodents and insects.  Since then they have caught over 100 mice in the house.  They made holes in the food pantry - they are eating their food, they've left droppings in the grand-daughers' rooms, holes in the sockets where mice are coming through.  When she mentioned the termites to the owner, he suggested that they get a cat.

SM Ross finds that a violation exists and provides the owner, 15 days, to get permitting or fines will begin to accumulate

Inspector Carbonell presents the facts of the case. Qin Chen and Xoa Me (not sure of spelling) are sworn in.  Mr. Me states that he hired a company, H.W. Paving, to do the paving on their property and the company said they would take care of everything.  He tried to get in touch with them when they got the violation, but he could not get hold of them.  He is now talking to someone else to see if they can get permitting. He also had receipts for the contractor he paid.

Mr. Coss comments that the owners unfortunately used an unlicensed contractor.  The Building Department has pursued this contractor.  Mr. Coss recommended that the owners contact the Sheriff's Department to file a complaint against the contractor, but that there is nothing further that the Building Department can do. 

SM Ross finds that a violation exists and provides the owner 60 days to obtain the permit.

SM Ross found that a violation exists and provided the owner 60 days to get the permit. 
 

Mr. Coss presents the facts of the case for this Massey Hearing. Fines accrued between the time that the Affidavit of Non Compliance and the 1st Massey Hearing.  The fines totaled $940.00.  The Administrative costs total $2,736.24 - Staff's recommendation is to reduce the fine to $500.00.

Paul Johnston, owner's husband, is sworn in.  He states his confusion because he spent a lot of money rehabing it and the rest of the street looks like a 3rd world country. Mr. Coss explains again that permitting expired and the fines began, the fines accrued until they were held in abeyance at the 1st Massey hearing.

SM Ross reduced the fine to $250.00 and 30 days to pay.

Mr. Coss presents the facts of the case.  The fines started accruing when the last extension expired.  Bishop Fisher is present as representative of the owner.  Bishop Fisher & Essie Fisher were both sworn in.

He explains that he was able to get the 501 C for the church, which should allow them to get a grant for the repairs.  But the offer expired, so they were pursuing a grant from Home Depot.  He went through a lot of emotional duress. 

SM Ross stays the fines, and recommends that they get the paperwork from Home Depot on the status of their grant and get a copy to Mr. Coss.

Mr. Coss presents the facts of the case.  He explains that the person that the violation came against (who was the owner of record), had fraudulently had the property transferred into her name, Keyonta Wynn. 

Owner not present, sent a representative.  Case continued to August Special Magistrate.

Owner seeking a partial release of lien on this property so that he can sell another property.  The sale will provide the owner with needed funds to address violations at this property.  Special Magistrate recommends partial release of lien for a fee of $500.00.  The lien on this property will remain in place until violations have been complied.