Parking Enforcement Officer Futch presented the case and explained the nature of the violation. Through questioning by Assistant City Attorney Earley, Officer Futch confirmed that he issued Citation # 9008 on September 9, 2019 and that the photos he took were time stamped and fairly and accurately depicted the violation.  Assistant City Attorney Earley requested the photos be admitted as City's composite 1.   Special Magistrate admitted them as City's composite1. 

Joanne McCurdy was sworn in. She said she owns a business downtown and has 14 employees. They don't open until 10:00 am and most designated parking spots is already taken. They make every attempt to move their cars every two hours. She was a few minutes late this particular morning and she found she had already received the citation.  She has met with the parking committee and the Mayor to see if they can get parking permits for the downtown businesses.  She has had no luck so far.  She asked, since this was the first citation she has received, if the City would waive it.

The Special Magistrate denied the appeal. He found a violation does exist and Joanne McCurdy is ordered to pay the amount on the citation, $50.00. He imposed the administrative charges of $10.00 and waived the $18.00 late fee for a total amount due of $60.00 payable within 30 days of the hearing date. Failure to pay the total amount within 30 days will result in the case being turned over to the St. Lucie County Court and an additional fee may be charged.

Charlene Adair, City of Fort Pierce volunteer testified. Through questioning by Assistant City Attorney Earley, Mrs. Adair explained her volunteer research as far as short term rentals are concerned.  She explained the advertising she found for 1234 S Indian River Drive on the different vacation rental sites. She presented the screen shots of these ads dated September 30, 2019. They are time stamped and fairly and accurately show the advertising. Assistant City Attorney Earley requested the photos be admitted as City's composite 1.   Special Magistrate admitted them as City's composite 1. 

The respondent was present via telephone. Kathryn Langdale was sworn in. Ms. Langdale said it was her understanding that the ads were taken down some time ago.  The rental company told her the ads were down.  She said she had proof that reservations have not been accepted since July and everything has been de-activated. She said, at this time, the ads have been taken down; however, she still as reservations for future rentals.

Chad Dawson, Code Enforcement Officer, explained the nature of the violation. Through questioning by Assistant City Attorney Earley, Officer Dawson confirmed that he initiated the amended notice for Case # 19-1204 on July 1, 2019.
 
Margaret Arraiz, Code Compliance Manager, stated she was the overseer of the code enforcement cases.  She was notified by Mrs. Adair that the ad was still up.  She contacted Ms. Langdale and told her the ad was not down.  The rental company sent proof that the ads were down and it was emailed to the City.  This is being presented as City's exhibit 2.  Mrs. Langdale was notified in May about the violations and that they are considered irreversible and irrevocable.

The Special Magistrate denied the appeal and found Kathryn Langdale, who is present via telephone conference, guilty and has conducted short- term rentals. The ads have been confirmed that they are down and the violator shall provide proof that all rental reservations have been cancelled. The rentals that have already commenced are considered irreversible and irrevocable in nature, and a fine of $2,200.00 is to be assessed payable within 30 days. He ordered that after the 30-day period, if not complied, all utilities to the premises are to be suspended while the violation continues. The violator has 30 days in which to appeal the decision in the Circuit Court of St. Lucie.

Code Officer Dawson read the facts of the case and explained the nature of the violation. Through questioning by Assistant City Attorney Earley, Officer Dawson confirmed that he initiated Case # 19-1684  on July 1, 2019 and as of the date of this hearing the violation was in compliance.  He requested a Review & Determination (R&D) Order from the Special Magistrate.

The Special Magistrate found that Section 22-22 did exist but has been cured as of the date of this hearing. The violators shall be warned that if these violations re-occur, pursuant to FL Statute 162.09, the Code Officer may notify the Special Magistrate and request that a fine be entered.

Code Compliance Manager Arraiz read the facts of the case and the 7 criteria required to make a decision for reducing the lien.  She also explained Option 2 of the Rules of Procdure for lien reductions.

Vernon Dixon was sworn in.  He agreed to pay the reduced fines within the 30 days.

Special Magistrate Rogers reviewed the 7 criteria required by Rule 17 and reduce the lien from $110,790.00 to $3,000.00 payable in 30 days. If not paid within that time, the lien would revert to its original amount.

Code Compliance Manager Arraiz read the facts of the case and the 7 criteria required to make a decision for reducing the lien.  She explained this was another request for reduction using Option 2 of the Rules of Procdure.

Vernon Dixon who was already sworn in agreed to pay this reduced fine; however, he asked for 60 days.  Mrs. Arraiz agreed to this time period.

Special Magistrate Rogers reviewed the 7 criteria required by Rule 17 and reduced the lien from $824,780.00 to $3,000.00 payable in 60 days. If not paid within that time, the lien would revert to its original amount.

Code Compliance Manager Arraiz read the facts of the case, presented photos and explained the nature of the violations.  An Affidavit of Unsafe Building was issued on July 23, 2019 requiring 30 days to initiate repair of the structure or City would move forward with condemnation for demolition.
 
Shaun Coss, Building Department Coordinator, came forward and explained his certification, education and qualifications to inspect the property and make a determination whether the house was safe or not.  He investigated the house and found numerous violations, but he recommended repairs rather than demolition.  This is an appeal for the condemnation only. Photos were presented. 

Mr. Coss confirmed  that the photos he took were time-stamped and fairly and accurately depicted the violation.  The photos were shown to Mr. Sweeting who acknowledged the photos as being accurate.  Assistant City Attorney Earley requested the photos be admitted as City's composite 1.   Special Magistrate admitted them as City's composite 1.  

Mr. Coss described the violations and matching photos in more detail.  He also clarified some of the violations whether in the unpermitted addition or the main buildng.  Based on all observations, Mr. Coss feels there are areas that can be repaired; however, the roof and the addition should be removed.  

Ronald Sweeting was sworn in.  The Special Magistrate did advise him that he has reviewed all documents and photos submitted.  Mr. Sweeting apologized for doing the work that was done in the 1980's without a permit.  He is appealing the condemnation as he would like to repair the damages to the house. His daughter and her family needs a place to stay.  He explained that he was a retired teacher, a church goer, and did his best to help the less fortunate to provide low income housing.

Andros Construction gave a proposal for repairing the damage.  Mr. Sweeting read several letters that were written regarding the damages at 202 N 21st Street.  One was from his daughter, Felicia, and others written to Michael Minard, architect.  

James Isaiha and Robert Snowden were sworn in as character witness and to testify about the care and trust Mr. Sweeting provided to them when he was having personal problems.  Mr. Isaiha helped with the maintenance of the property.  

Mr. Sweeting said he would like to pursue Andros Roofing Construction's proposal.  The Special Magistrate stated his concerns were that Mr. Sweeting can't just repair the roof over the kitchen, but everything else including the rest of the roof, electrical, plumbing, access, etc. has to be repaired, corrected, or removed to bring it up to code.

The Special Magistrate after hearing testimony from the City and the respondent denied the appeal. Based on the condition of the roof, the electrical and plumbing damage caused by the fire, he is affirming the order of condemnation. He has 30 days to appeal the decision to the Circuit Court.