Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout02-27-1996 Minutes filkw MINUTES OF THE CITY OF OCOEE CODE ENFORCEMENT BOARD MEETING HELD ON February 27, 1996 CALL TO ORDER Chairman Sills called the regular meeting of the Ocoee Board of Code Enforcement to order at 7:33 p.m. in the Commission Chambers of City Hall and led in the pledge of allegiance. Member Linebarier led in prayer. The roll was called and a quorum declared present. PRESENT: Chairman Sills, Vice Chairman Carlsson, Members Linebarier, Lenko, Santo, and Alternate Members Holmes and Skiles. Also present were Attorney Feeney, Building and Zoning Official Flippen, Code Enforcement Officers Braddy and Simon, Deputy Clerk Seaver and Clerk/Stenographer Lewis. ABSENT: Members Shagner (excused) and Chestney (unexcused). APPROVALS This item consisted of the Minutes of the January 23, 1996 Code Enforcement Board meeting. Clerk Stenographer Lewis asked for a correction on page 4 in the second to last paragraph should read "...testimony ..." rather than "tstimony"; and on page 9, Case No. 96-06, Ground Tek of Central FL, the first date should read "1/15/96 NOCV" rather than "1/15/95..." In response to Member Lenko, Vice Chairman Carlsson said that page 6, "Ms. Tawari fer Ms. West?) had submitted two letters as evidence that plumbers had been hired concerning the problem." Member Lenko, seconded by Vice Chairman Carlsson, moved to a. 'rove the Minutes of the January 23, 1996 Code Enforcement Board meeting as corrected. Motion carried 6-0. COMMENTS FROM CITIZENS None • HEARINGS OF STATEMENT OF VIOLATIONS PURSUANT TO NOTICES OF HEARING - The description of the violation(s) and the dates of inspection(s) will be given at the beginning of each case. Code representation: NOCV - Notice of Code Violation; NOH - Notice of Hearing; SOV - Statement of Violation(s); and POS - Proof of Service. Member Linebarier, seconded by Member Santo, due to Non-Proof of Service and at the request of the City, moved to continued Cases No. 96-10, 96-11, 96-12, 96-14, 96-15, 96-16, 96-18, 96-23, 96-30, 96-31, 96-32, 96-34, and 96-38 to the next meeting. Motion carried 6-0. 96-07, JOHN R. PALMER & BRYAN K. MANNING 1/18/95 NOCV - Re-inspection Date:1/31/96 01/31/96 NOH - Board Meeting Date:2/27/96 1/31/96 SOV 02/02/96 POS - Mail Cert#P597-456-640 At the request of Chairman Sills, Code Enforcement Officers Braddy and Simon were sworn in by Deputy Clerk Seaver. Code Enforcement Officer Simon said that Case No. 96-07 referred to the property at 701 Catwood Drive. On January 12, 1996, she had observed a plywood wall and window being erected around a carport but no permit was posted. After confirmation that no permit had been issued, an NOCV was hand delivered to the property Code Enforcement Board Meeting February 27, 1996 owner as identified by Orange County Tax Records, John R. Palmer & Bryan K. Manning, for violation of City Code, Chapter 51-21: Permit Required: "It shall be a violation of this Article for any person to do any building construction, repair work, alteration or remodeling of any building within the scope of this Article without first obtaining a permit therefore from the Building Department;" The respondents were given until January 28, 1996 to come into compliance. On January 31, 1996, an SOV and NOH for this Board meeting was sent to the property owner via restricted delivery by Deputy Clerk Seaver. POS was obtained on February 2, 1996. The owners have made no contact or requested a re- inspection. However, a re-inspection on February 27, 1996 found the property to be in compliance. The materials enclosing the carport had been removed. John Palmer, 701 Catwood Drive, was sworn in by Deputy Clerk Seaver, and testified that he had not understood that he was to pull the permit by the 28th so he had just taken the face wall down. He had wanted to cover tools so no one could see them. He had torn down the wall the day after he had gotten the Notice. Member Linebarier, seconded by Vice Chairman Carlsson, moved to find John R. Palmer & Bryan K. Manning, Case No. 96-07, 701 Catwood Drive, in violation of City Code, Chapter 51-21 as of January 28, 1996 but in compliance as of February 27, 1996, and that no penalty be assessed. Motion carried 6-0. Chairman Sills explained that while there was no fine or penalty for the first violation, a repeat violation of the same offense meant that they may be penalized before getting a hearing. 96-08, ALLIANCE MORTGAGE 1/08/96 NOCV - Re-inspection Date:2/6/96 2/08/96 NOH - Board Meeting Date:2/27/96 2/08/96 SOV 2/08/96 POS - Mail Cert#P882-518-546 Chairman Sills said for the record that no one was present to represent the case. Code Enforcement Officer Simon said that Case No. 96-08 referred to the property at 604 Sherwood Oaks Circle. The City had received several complaints about the condition of a vacant house at that address. The siding was rotted, receptacles were hanging from the walls, and kids were accessing the property through broken windows. The yard were not being maintained. An inspection for a Minimum Standard Codes of the City had been made on January 6, 1996, and on January 8, 1996, a NOCV and a letter explaining the violations had been mailed to the property owner as identified by Orange County Tax Records, Alliance Mortgage, giving the respondent 60 days to comply with the violation of City Code, Chapter 108 Minimum Standards Code; Article II Housing Minimum Standards Code: 108-22 Minimum Requirements for Electrical systems: "Wiring and equipment shall be maintained in accordance with NEC." 108-23 (D)Exterior Walls: "Shall be free of cracks, rotted wood etc." (I) Windows: "Shall be kept in good repair, weather-tight, rodent proof, etc." The respondent had been given until January 17, 1996 to correction the violations. Officer Sitnon said that on January 17, she had received contact from Sarah with Alliance Mortgage, who stated that it was not their policy to go in and fix conditions like the exterior wall and the electrical since this was a foreclosure. They would board the windows and maintain the yard. Upon Sarah's request, the respondent was granted an extension to February 1, 1996. A re- inspection found the property in non-compliance. Nothing had been done to the electrical or the siding, and the windows were not secure. On February 8, 1996, an SOV and NOH to this 2 Code Enforcement Board Meeting February 27, 1996 Board meeting was sent via restricted delivery. Officer Simon had contacted Sarah who stated that Alliance Mortgage had been charged for having it done by a local company. A re- inspection on February 27, 1996, found that plywood, painted white, had been bolted over the windows. The house was no longer accessible. Ms. Simon said that she did not know the status of the electrical violations without access to the building. The exterior walls remained in non-compliance. In response to Member Linebarier, Officer Simon said that the foreclosure was complete and Alliance Mortgage was the property owner. Vice Chairman Carlsson, seconded by Member Linebarier, moved to find Alliance Mortgage, Case No. 96-08, 604 Sherwood Oaks Circle, in non-compliance of City Code, Chapter 108 Minimum Standards Code; Article II, 108-22, 108- 23 (D) Exterior Walls, 108-23 (I) Windows, as of February 1, 1996 and remained in non- compliance as of February 27, 1996, and be given until March 12, 1996 to come into compliance or be fined $100 per day thereafter. Motion carried 6-0. 96-09, S. C. BATTAGLIA TRUSTEE 12/12/95 NOCV - Re-inspection Date:1/25/96 2/08/96 NOH - Board Meeting Date:2/27/96 2/08/96 SOV 2/09/96 POS - Mail Cert#P882-518-521 Code Enforcement Officer Simon said that Case No. 96-09 referred to the property at 8620 Clarcona-Ocoee Road. Officer Simon said she had received a complaint, along with photographs, from the City Engineer Jim Shira, regarding trash and debris at this location. The photographs, Exhibits "A" and "B," were presented for review by the Board. On December 6, 1995, Officer Simon said that she and the City Zoning Coordinator Harper had inspected the property in violation, observing the existing conditions. On November 21, 1995, a Statement and an NOCV were sent to the property owner as identified by Orange County Tax Records, S. C. Battaglia Trustee, for violation of City Code, Chapter 115-3 Prohibited Acts: "No person shall allow to be dumped, placed, accumulated or otherwise located on lands or premises owned by such person within the city any nuisance and menace to public health, safety and welfare, etc..." The observation had been that of numerous piles of trash and debris, including furniture, etc. The property owner was given until December 21, 1995 to bring the property into compliance. A representative for the respondent contacted Ms. Simon, advising her that the problem would be resolved, and a request for an extension to the beginning of the year was granted at that time. On February 8, 1996, an SOV and NOH for this Board meeting were sent to the property owner via restricted delivery. The City had received no further communication regarding this case. A re-inspection on February 27, 1996 found the property in non-compliance. A video of the property in violation was presented for review by the Board. In response to Vice Chairman Carlsson, Officer Simon said that the respondent had been given an extension to January 10, 1996 to come into compliance. Bob Battaglia, P. O. Box 574738, Orlando 32857-4738, and president of Battaglia Fruit Company, was sworn in by Deputy Clerk Seaver. In response to Attorney Feeney's question tkisor 3 Code Enforcement Board Meeting /44o.. February 27, 1996 about his relationship to this trust, a fictitious entity, Mr. Battaglia said that (the respondent) was his father, 89 years old and still living, who had bought the property as trustee some years ago, and it had remained that way. He testified that he had permission to speak for the respondent, that when the company had originally bought the property it had been orange grove which was killed in the freeze. Pine trees had been planted. This was a continuing and extensive problem and he did not know what to do about it. People did not want to pay a dumping fee and had dumped their trash on this property. "No Trespassing" signs had been placed and quickly torn down at the location. He explained the difficulty in catching people that were dumping, and expressed concern about preventing future violations. Alternate Member Skiles arrived to the meeting at 8:06 p.m. Member Linebarier explained that unfortunately it was the responsibility of the property owner. The Board was in no position to offer any recommendations as to how they could prevent this from happening in the future. The Board's sole purpose was to determine whether it was an infraction of the Codes. In response to Vice Chairman Carlsson, Mr. Battaglia said that it would be several day's work, and asked for a two or three week extension. Vice Chairman Carlsson, seconded by Member Santo, moved to find S. C. Battaglia Trustee, Case No. 96-09, 8620 Clarcona-Ocoee Road, in non-compliance of City Code, Chapter 115-3 as of January 10, 1996, and be given until April 1, 1996 to come into compliance or be fined $100 a day thereafter, Member Linebarier objected and wanted to discuss the deadline date. Member Linebarier, seconded by Member Lenko, moved to amend the compliance date to March 12, 1996. Motion carried 6-0. Vote was then taken on the original motion, as amended. Motion carried 6-0. Alternate Member Skiles, having just arrived to the meeting, abstained from voting. Chairman Sills explained to Mr. Battaglia about repeat violations. 96-10, MEER INC. - 121 Olympus Drive 1/9/96 NOCV - Re-inspection Date:2/8/96 2/09/96 NOH - Board Meeting Date:2/27/96 2/09/96 SOV 2/09/96 POS - Mail Cert#P882-518-522 At the request of the City, Case No. 96-10 was tabled to the next meeting. 96-11, DEAN HARPER INC. - 118 Sandy Key Court (Repeat Violation) 2/14/96 NOCV - Re-inspection Date:1/26/96 2/19/96 NOH - Board Meeting Date:2/27/96 2/19/96 SOV 2/20/96 POS - Mail Cert#P882-518-632 At the request of the City, Case No. 96-11 was tabled to the next meeting. 96-12, THE RAY HARPER TRUST AGREEMENT - 118 Sandy Key Court (Repeat Violation) 4 Code Enforcement Board Meeting February 27, 1996 2/14/96 NOCV - Re-inspection Date:1/26/96 2/19/96 NOH - Board Meeting Date:2/27/96 2/19/96 SOV 2/20/96 POS - Mail Cert#P882-518-633 At the request of the City, Case No. 96-12 was tabled to the next meeting. 96-13, DONALD PAUL SLUDER 2/14/96 NOCV - Re-inspection Date:2/19/96 2/19/96 NOH - Board Meeting Date:2/27/96 2/19/96 SOV 2/20/96 POS - Mail Cert#P882-518-634 Chairman Sills said for the record that no one was present to represent the case. Code Enforcement Officer Simon said that Case No. 96-13 referred to the property at 118 Sandy Key Court. At the request of the Water Department, Officer Simon had responded on January 26, 1996 to the area of 36 and 37 Eagle Key Court and 58, 59 W. Circle Key Court, regarding a complaint of those trailers accessing water by being tied to each other. Through the investigation, it was discovered that the property was owned by Dean Harper. Several tenants had relayed that they were asked to tie into the other trailer by Mr. Don Sluder via a note that Don Sluder worked out of the office at 118 Sandy Key where they had paid their rent. Further investigation led to the water and the rent being paid at this address. Ms. Simon said that this prompted an investigation about a business being operated out of 118 Sandy Key Court. A tenant had shown receipts where he had paid for water and rent at 59 W. Circle Key to Mr. Sluder for property rented from Mr. Harper. The tenant had allowed her to retain the receipts for copying, Ms. Simon said that she had been given permission to write on the back of the receipts as to where the tenant had paid the bills and where he had received the receipts. The original receipts were presented for review by the Board. Member Linebarier marked the copies as evidence, Exhibits 1, 2, and 3. (The original copies were not entered as evidence.) In response to Member Lenko, Officer Simon said for clarification that this particular address involved three cases, two of which were repeat offenders and the January 26 date was the date for the repeat offender, however, that did not apply to Mr. Sluder. This was a first offense and the respondent was given until February 19, 1996 to come into compliance. Code Enforcement Officer Simon presented evidence, Exhibits 4-20, that Mr. Sluder was operating a business without obtaining an Occupational License. A research of local licenses agencies produced no license for practicing attorney, Mr. Sluder. The Florida Bar Association showed Mr. Sluder's address as 118 Sandy Key Court (Exhibit 14). Officer Simon testified that on February 14, 1996, Donald Paul Sluder, 118 Sandy Key Court where he resides, was cited for violation of City Code, Chapter 119-2 Engaging in business without license: "It shall be unlawful for any person to engage in any business, occupation or profession within the City without a license issued hereunder or upon a license issued upon false statements made by any person or on behalf of such person. In any prosecution under this section, the fact that such person is conducting such business shall be prima facia evidence of a violation hereof." The respondent was given until February 19, 1996 to come into compliance. No license had been pulled on February 19, 1996 and there had been no contact from Mr. Sluder. On February 19, 1996, an SOV and NOH for this Board meeting 5 Code Enforcement Board Meeting February 27, 1996 was sent to the respondent, Proof of Service was obtained on February 20, 1996. Officer Simon said that she had been called to the Water Department on February 20, 1996, about water bills at Mr. Harper's property. A tenant was inquiring about how she was being billed for her water by Mr. Harper, and relayed that she had rented her trailer from Mr. Harper who had stated to the tenant that he had an on-site office in the trailer park. The tenant had also stated that Mr. Harper had represented that Mr. Sluder was his attorney, and that she should talk to him at the office at 118 Sandy Key if she had any problems; and that she paid her rent and water bill at 118 Sandy Key Court and Mr. Sluder had printed from his computer a signed 3-day Notice. Mr. Sluder had served it to her at the 118 Sandy Key Court address. Discussion ensued about the address and location of the business. Member Linebarier left at 8:51 p.m. and returned to the meeting at 8:53 p.m. Officer Simon said that a copy of an Occupational License for Mr. Sluder was delivered on February 27, 1996, by Karen. This Orange County license had been obtained on February 20, 1996, and issued to 750 N. Maitland Boulevard, Maitland address. Ms. Simon said that she called the City of Maitland to verify a license for Mr. Sluder and whether that address was within the City limits. The City of Maitland verified that they would have to issue Mr. Sluder a license prior to him getting an Orange County license, and Mr. Sluder did not have a license with them. The 750 N. Maitland Boulevard address belonged to Randall Smith, and verified car with Vivian Jackson, City of Maitland. Ms. Simon contacted Orange County licensing about the matter, and was informed that they would review Mr. Sluder's license. Discussion ensued about the type of business Mr. Sluder was operating out of 118 Sandy Key Court. Member Lenko, seconded by Member Santo, moved to find Donald Paul Sluder, Case No. 96-13, in non-compliance of City Code, Chapter 119-2, as of February 27, 1996, and that he be given until March 5, 1996 to come into compliance or be fined $250 a day thereafter. Motion carried 7-0. 96-14, RODRIQUEZ, FERNANDEZ AND MARIA - 9 W. Circle Key Drive 2/10/96 NOCV - Re-inspection Date:2/19/96 2/19/96 NOH - Board Meeting Date:2/27/96 2/19/96 SOV 2/20/96 POS - Mail Cert#P882-518-635 At the request of the City, Case No. 96-14 was tabled to the next meeting. 96-15, DEACON JONES - 651 LF Roper Parkway 2/12/96 NOCV - Re-inspection Date:2/19/96 2/20/96 NOH - Board Meeting Date:2/27/96 2/20/96 SOV 2/21/96 POS - Mail Cert#P882-518-526 At the request of the City, Case No. 96-14 was tabled to the next meeting. 96-16, CAKES AND CATERING & BAR-B-QUE, INC. - 14 W. McKey Street 2/12/96 NOCV - Re-inspection Date:2/19/96 2/20/96 NOH - Board Meeting Date:2/27/96 2/20/96 SOV 2/21/96 POS - Mail Cert#P882-518-527 At the request of the City, Case No. 96-16 was tabled to the next meeting. 6 Code Enforcement Board Meeting February 27, 1996 96-18, JOAN CRAWFORD DANCE STUDIO - 10972 W. Colonial Drive 2/12/96 NOCV - Re-inspection Date:2/19/96 2/20/96 NOH - Board Meeting Date:2/27/96 2/20/96 SOV 2/21/96 POS - Mail Cert#P882-518-529 At the request of the City, Case No. 96-18 was tabled to the next meeting. 96-20, WORLD WIDE BUILDING SYSTEMS, INC. - 2801 Professional Parkway 2/12/96 NOCV - Re-inspection Date:2/19/96 2/20/96 NOH - Board Meeting Date:2/27/96 2/20/96 SOV 2/21/96 POS - Mail Cert#P882-518-766 A Notice of Dismissal was presented to the Board for this case. 96-22, FUN VENDING INC. - 11029 West Colonial Drive 2/12/96 NOCV - Re-inspection Date:2/19/96 2/20/96 NOH - Board Meeting Date:2/27/96 2/20/96 SOV 2/21/96 POS - Mail Cert#P882-518-768 A Notice of Dismissal was presented to the Board for this case. 96-23, ROBERT'S WELDING & TRANSPORT, INC. - 905 Silver Star Road 2/12/96 NOCV - Re-inspection Date:2/19/96 2/20/96 NOH - Board Meeting Date:2/27/96 2/20/96 SOV 2/21/96 POS - Mail Cert#P882-518-518 At the request of the City, Case No. 96-23 was tabled to the next meeting. 96-26, CUTTING EDGE TOPIARY - 410 Orlando Ave STE 18A Lry 2/12/96 NOCV - Re-inspection Date:2/19/96 2/20/96 NOH Board Meeting Date:2/27/96 2/20/96 SOV 2/21/96 POS - Mail Cert#P882-518-520 A Notice of Dismissal was presented to the Board for this case. 96-30, DISCOUNT PAINTING - 6901 Log Jam Court 2/12/96 NOCV - Re-inspection Date:2/19/96 2/20/96 NOH - Board Meeting Date:2/27/96 2/20/96 SOV 2/21/96 POS - Mail Cert#P882-518-618 At the request of the City, Case No. 96-30 was tabled to the next meeting. 96-31, EXPRESS SIGNS & GRAPHICS - 238 Rewis Street 2/12/96 NOCV - Re-inspection Date:2/19/96 2/20/96 NOH - Board Meeting Date:2/27/96 2/20/96 SOV 2/21/96 POS - Mail Cert#P882-518-619 At the request of the City, Case No. 96-31 was tabled to the next meeting. 96-33, DEMETRO CONSTRUCTION & DESIGN - 514 Nicole Boulevard 2/12/96 NOCV - Re-inspection Date:2/19/96 2/20/96 NOH - Board Meeting Date:2/27/96 2/20/96 SOV 2/21/96 POS - Mail Cert#P882-518-636 A Notice of Dismissal was presented to the Board for this case. 96-34, SNOW BIZ - 5018 Waterwheel Court 2/12/96 NOCV - Re-inspection Date:2/19/96 2/20/96 NOH - Board Meeting Date:2/27/96 2/20/96 SOV 2/21/96 POS - Mail Cert#P882-518-637 At the request of the City, Case No. 96-34 was tabled to the next meeting. Code Enforcement Board Meeting Naw February 27, 1996 96-35, FREDDY GILL - 713 Lakeview Drive 2/12/96 NOCV - Re-inspection Date:2/19/96 2/20/96 NOH - Board Meeting Date:2/27/96 2/20/96 SOV 2/21/96 POS - Mail Cert#P882-518-638 A Notice of Dismissal was presented to the Board for this case. 96-38, TRIBUNAL ENTERPRISES - 2602 Cedar Bluff Lane 2/12/96 NOCV - Re-inspection Date:2/19/96 2/20/96 NOH - Board Meeting Date:2/27/96 2/20/96 SOV 2/21/96 POS - Mail Cert#P882-518-837 At the request of the City, Case No. 96-38 was tabled to the next meeting. 96-39, TECHNIQUES - 2602 Cedar Bluff Lane 2/12/96 NOCV - Re-inspection Date:2/19/96 2/20/96 NOH - Board Meeting Date:2/27/96 2/20/96 SOV 2/21/96 POS - Mail Cert#P882-518-640 • A Notice of Dismissal was presented to the Board for this case. OTHER BUSINESS 96-04, DARTHA TAWARI - 905 Flewelling Avenue 11/10/95 NOCV - Re-inspection Date:11/10/95 1/10/96 NOH - Board Meeting Date:1/23/96 1/10/96 SOV 1/11/96 POS - Mail Cert#P597-456-635 1/23/96 Compliance Order:2/2/96 or $200 a day 2/3/96? Affidavit of Non-Compliance corthereafter Chairman Sills said for the record that no one was present to represent the case. Code Enforcement Officer Simon testified that Case No. 96-04 was to be re-inspected for compliance on February 2, 1996 but originating Officer Braddy had been away. Officer Simon said that she had gone to the property on several occasions to deal with the tenant who would not allow the landlord or contractors in to make repairs. During re-inspection, Officer Simon had explained to Mr. Tawari about what was needed to bring the property into compliance, and he had completed all but one plumbing issue that had been done the following working day. It was Officer Simon's opinion that if Mr.Tawari had not had so many obstacles the contractors would have been done by February 2, 1996. She had failed to tell him that he needed another smoke detector to be in compliance. Vice Chairman Carlsson, seconded by Alternate Member Holmes, moved to continue Case No. 96-04, Dartha Tawari, until the March meeting referencing the Affidavit of Non-compliance, and have the City contact the respondent in regards to Chapter 108-19 Minimum Standard for Basic Equipment(I), Install a smoke detector. Motion carried 7-0. Member Lenko stated before the Board voted and for the record, as she had been absent during last month's meeting, that she had come to City Hall on February 27, 1996 to listen to the tape and view the evidence in this case. 95-58, BARBRA BALL - 4/4/95 NOCV - Re-inspection Date:4/14/95 4/14/95 NOH - Board Meeting Date:4/25/95 4/14/95 SOV 4/18/95 POS - Mail - Cert#P882-518-501 4/25/95 Compliance Order:5/2/95 or $100 a day 5/2/95 Affidavit of Non-compliance 8 Code Enforcement Board Meeting f'sit,,,, February 27, 1996 thereafter 5/23/95 Order Imposing Fine & Lien:To begin 5/3/95 10/24/95 Motion for Re-Hearing-Denied 11/28/95 Motion for Re-Hearing • 2/27/96 Motion for Re-Hearing - Re:Reduction of Fines An Affidavit of Compliance was presented to the Board for this case. Richard Crane, 89 Buck Key Court, was sworn in by Deputy Clerk Seaver, and testified that he did not have written authorization to represent Barbra Ball or Garfield Holmes but Mr. Holmes had spoken with Ms. Seaver several times. Deputy Clerk Seaver stated that Mr. Holmes had verbally given permission for Mr. Crane to act on his behalf. Attorney Feeney said that the Board had the power but was not required to reduce any fine that it implemented. In response to Member Linebarier, Deputy Clerk Seaver said that effective May 3, 1995 to the Compliance date of November 17, 1995, the total amount of fines were $19,700. Vice Chairman Carlsson, seconded by Member Linebarier, moved to hear Mr. Crane on behalf of Mr. Holmes in Case No. 95-58. No action was taken. Mr. Crane said that Mr. Holmes' only defense was that he had not owned the property and that he had had no control over it when it was sold to Barbra Ball. He said that Mr. Holmes lived in Maine and had no say over what Barbra Ball had done to the property. The property was no longer in his name, that it had been sold. Discussion ensued about foreclosure of the property, and Attorney Feeney explained that it had been a deed to foreclosure. Member Lenko said that she would like to see the Board reduce the fine and allow these people to move on with their lives. Vice Chairman Carlsson, seconded by Member Lenko, moved that the fine be reduced to $1,300. Motion carried 7-0. Attorney Feeney explained that the City would be filing an amended lien reducing the amount so that the interest would tickle on the lower amount. 95-143, SIDNEY A. RIVARD AND/OR JANET RIVARD 10/3/95 NOCV - Re-inspection Date:10/16/95 10/18/95 NOH - Board Meeting Date:10/24/95 10/18/95 SOV 10/18/95 POS - Mail - Cert#P597-456-614 10/24/95 Compliance Order:Due 10/31/95 or 10/31/95 Affidavit of Non-Compliance $250 a day thereafter 11/28/95 Order Imposing Fine & Lien:Beg.11/1/95 Code Enforcement Officer Simon testified that Case No. 95-143 referred to the property at 605 Jay Street. The original citation of the property for violation of City Code, Chapter 165-3 Prohibited acts (a): "No person shall abandon or keep any junk vehicle on any public property or any private property within the corporate limits of the City of Ocoee. The observation had been that of a white Ford truck on jacks without a tag and an inoperable vehicle without tag in rear yard. Chapter 115-3 Prohibited Acts: "No person shall allow to be dumped, placed, accumulated or otherwise located on lands or premises owned by such person within the city any nuisance and menace to public health, safety and welfare ..." The observation had been that of miscellaneous debris and trash including numerous gas cans, tires etc. in the front side and rear yard. Chapter 108-23(M): "Every exterior door shall be substantially weather-tight, water-tight and rodent proof and shall be kept in sound working condition and good repair." The observation had been that of a large hole in the front door with torn plastic over it. Chapter 158-8 (or Swimming Pools, Responsibilities of owners (A): "The owner or persons responsible for the pool operation shall keep in service all items designed for the purification of the water supply or its protection from pollution to perform 9 Code Enforcement Board Meeting February 27, 1996 adequately the function for which they were designed." The observation had been that of a swimming pool with green water, not kept in a sanitary but in an polluted condition. Officer Simon said that the agent for the owner, Pat Bond, had inquired about what was needed to bring the property into compliance so that they could approach the Board regarding the Fine and Lien. A re-inspection of the property found the violation for Chapter 165-3 (a); 115-3 Prohibited Acts; and 108-23 (M) had come into compliance, however, Chapter 158-8 (A) remained in non- compliance. A video of the property in violation was presented for review by the Board. In response to Vice Chairman Carlsson, Member Lenko said that the fine to date was $29,750. • Janet Rivard, 4114 Shade Tree Loop, Orlando, was sworn in by Deputy Clerk Seaver, and stated that she had not lived at the property for three years. Sale of the property was pending. Pat Bond, Broker and owner of Palm Tree Properties, Inc., 229 Franklin Street, was sworn in by Deputy Clerk Seaver, and testified that she had a buyer and contract for sale on the property located at 605 Jay Street. Ms. Bond explained that they were trying to save it from foreclosure, and that she and Ms. Rivard had done everything that they could do, within their power, to bring the property into compliance. The Notices that had been sent in October had been forwarded to Ms. Rivard's husband. The Rivards were separated, pending divorce. Mr. Rivard Now has no interest in the property. Ms. Bond also said that Ms. Rivard, a business person who had been a productive resident of the city, does not have the means or the ability to be able to take care of it. She said that Ms. Rivard had a distressed property that was going into foreclosure. The mortgage holder is refunding on it. A VA Assumable Non-qualifying, and Ms. Bond said that she did have a buyer that will be taking over the property. The Rivards will not receive any money from the sale of the property. Ms. Bond said that there was no money to pay the lien, and asked for consideration to a distressed property, if they can bring it out of distress, she had every belief that she could get the property closed within five days. Ms. Bond informed the Board that the lien would drop once the house hits the Courthouse steps. The home would then go to the HUD list. She also said that in approximately 21 days, then it would be turned over to the HUD attorneys in Tampa and it would be taken out of all our hands. The house would sit there as she could not do anything. Discussion ensued about draining the swimming pool, and also, in lifting the lien. Those supporting a decision by the Board that would allow Ms. Bond to bring the property into compliance and sell the property, were sworn in and testified to that effect, as follows: Betty Hager, 511 Orange Avenue; Lowell Boggs, 604 Jay Street; Joe Andrews, Jr., 609 Jay Street; and Josh Merritt, 628 Jay Street. Member Linebarier, seconded by Vice Chairman Carlsson, moved that Case No. 95-143, that the Board reduce the total fine of $29,750 to the amount of $100 contingent upon the Code Low Enforcement Officials and Building Officials of the City finding the property in compliance. Motion carried 6-1. Alternate Member Skiles objected and voted "nay." 10 Code Enforcement Board Meeting February 27, 1996 COMMENTS City Manager: None Code Enforcement Officer Braddy: None Code Enforcement Officer Simon: None Police Department: None Deputy Clerk Seaver: None BOARD MEMBERS Member Linebarier thanked Deputy Clerk Seaver and the Building Officials, publicly, for answering his request for entering the Notices of liens, etc. in the records. They had done it very quickly after they had requested it. It had taken 60 days on some of them and he sincerely hoped that it would not take that long in the future. Alternate Member Holmes inquired about the Board's request to have the attorney look into revising the Code that refers to the 60 day period for owner/occupants, and investors, that it be reduced down to zero, at the last meeting. Attorney Feeney distributed a memorandum regarding the request. The Board will review the material for discussion at the next meeting. Vice Chairman Carlsson asked for Attorney Feeney's opinion about people coming before the Board can lobby or talk to the Board members reference to the case prior to coming to the meeting. Attorney Feeney said that this group sits in the nature of the judicial board as opposed to a legislative board. Zoning issues that affect the City as a whole, tax issues, issues about growth management policies are considered either legislative or quasi judicial. In the sense that citizens do not have a great deal of leeway, traditionally in Florida, to go to their individual Commission members and "lobby" them. That part of the law was changing in Florida but in terms of the Code Enforcement Board, Mr. Feeney said that they sat very much like a judge. Discussion had been held before about the Board could not bring cases as that would be mixing the roll of police officer or prosecutor with the roll of judge. By the same token, the Board Members could not be discussing with each other or with City staff, or with a party that was going to come before them, their individual circumstances. If they received a written correspondence from someone, their obligation was to file that written correspondence at the time of the hearing. If they received a telephone conversation that becomes obvious that someone was coming before the Board, the Member should tell the individual that they can't discuss it with them any further because you were not permitted to have ex-parte communications. Mr. Feeney encouraged them to cut those conversations off as quickly as possible. In the past, he said that he had told the Board, he stood by the proposition that somebody suggests that a Board Member go by and take a look at a piece of property for they would like to you to aware, for instance, of the physical surroundings. They may come and make a "pitch" to you. The Board Member could go do that and they could come before the Board and say that they were called by "so and so", and I went out to look at the property and that was the only communication that we had. They were appropriate as long as they were disclosed. In terms of speaking of the merits of the case, the Board Members must cut anyone who tries with them on the "merits off." Alternate Member Skiles: None Member Santo: None Member Lenko commended the Code Enforcement and the Building Department on the job they 11 Code Enforcement Board Meeting February 27, 1996 had done with Mr. Sluder's case. In response to Ms. Lenko, Chairman Sills said that the Selection Committee had met on February 19, 1996 and the recommendation for the Code Enforcement Board attorney were turned over to the Building Official who would be turning those over to the City Commission. The Board should receive confirmation in the near future regarding a permanent attorney. Vice Chairman Carlsson, seconded by Member Lenko, moved that the Board recommend to the City Commission that Thomas C. Feeney, III, Esquire, be hired as the Code Enforcement attorney. No action was taken. Chairman Sills said that when it is on the City Commission agenda, that the Board Members could attend the Commission meeting to support the hiring of Attorney Feeney. • Attorney Feeney: None Commissioner Anderson commended the Board on doing a good job. Chairman Sills: 1) Inquired about the guideline for calling an emergency meeting, and Attorney Feeney said that the Chairman of the Board could call such a meeting as long as three (3) members were present. Three (3) or four (4) members could do that if the Chairman declined. It had precipitated Mr. Carlsson's inquiry to him was "what happens when somebody comes and says we have an emergency situation and we need an emergency Board meeting." Attorney Feeney said that in a sense that it was lobbying, that it was an ex- parte communication. A request should be made in writing to file at the next Board meeting, that it would be considered immediately, and that the Member would get in touch with that person. If the Chairman declined to give the emergency meeting, it was probably appropriate, as they did that, to advise them that three (3) other members of the Board could over rule the Chairman. It was appropriate to enter written communication into the record during the public hearing, and if there was an oral communication the Board Member should briefly disclose the nature that they had been approached but they could not discuss the merits until the hearing. 2) Explained that the City had been working to improve the AC in the Board room. 3) Supported the Board's recommendation of Mr. Feeney as attorney to the Board. ADJOURNMENT The meeting was adjourned at 10:35 p.m. APPROVED: Attest: Liy.,n, laux Sh:. Seaver, t-•uty Clerk J' Sills, Chairman ie Lewis, Cler Stenographer 12