CEB_08-25-81_Minr ,
v� -TH F sr�TF
� =a► � � �r O
a
`C OD W E Yp
�iistnrir
(fitg of X ongivand
175 Pest Oarrrti �ur.
Xvii Alurida 32750
Zel. 831 -0555
SINCE 1 88-3
K f +
7�
August 25, 1981
The Codes Enforcement Board of the City of Longwood, Florida met at 7:30 p.m.
Present: Richard I. Wallsh
Steven Kircher
Virgil Pavane
Bob Thomas
William Mitchell
B. H. Farrell
Marvin Rooks, City Attorney
Donald Terry, Board Secretary
1. Chairman wallsh called the meeting to order. Mr Kirc was not present
at 7:30 p.m. when meeting first convened and Mr. B. H. Farrell was seated as
an alternate. Mr. Kircher arrived at 7:35 but Mr. Farrell rained seated as
a der. Pledge of allegiance to the United States Flag.
2. Lotion by Mr. Pavone , seconded by Mr. Mitchell that reading of minutes
of July 28, 1981 meeting be dispensed with and that minutes be approved as
submitted. Motion carried by us vote.
3. There were no public hearings scheduled, no unfinished business and
no filed affidavits to present.
4. Mr. John Yarnall was present with his attorney, Mr Ned Julian. Mr
Julian addressed the Board and stated that he had been toyed by Mr. Yarna
subsequent to the last meeting. Mr. Julian said that he had been in contact
with Mr. Chacey and Mr. Terry concerning Mr. Yarnal l . He said that Mr. Yarnall
was requesting an extension of time in which to complete remval of the vehicles
and Mr . Julian said he thought Mr. Yarnall had made good progress in removing
the cars. Mr. Julian said it was his understanding that Mr. Yarnall may have
given the inxpres s ion that he was too casual concerning the board but he may
have done so based on information he had received from an attorney who suggested
that he may have been "grandfathered" in at his location and therefore permitted
to have vehicles on his property. Mr. Julian said Mr. Yarnall now desired to
c lete removal of the vehicles as soon as possible but that he needed some
additional time since he was employed and could only move the vehicles on weekends.
5. Mr Rooks stated that he had dis the matter earlier with Mr Julian and
he did not believe the board had the authority to grant an extension once the
deadline for compliance had passed. Mr. Rooks said that the board would have the
power to request the Commission to consider an extension if they chose to do so.
Mr Rooks said the board would have authority up until the deadline and he
suggested that any further action should come from the City �11
6. Mr. Julian said he thought there should be an appropriate period of time
for requesting an ext ension, that this meeting was the first opportunity he
had to request an extension. Mr. Julian said that Codes Enforcemmt Boards
were new and not all attorney's were aware of then..
.i
"0
7. Mr. Wallsh said that he did not believe that the Codes Enforcement
Board had the authority to grant an extension or to rebate the fine.
Mr. Wallsh said he was not rec mending that it be done but the Commission
had the authority to amend the ordinance granting the Board authority to
grant extensions.
8. Motion by Mr. Wallsh that Mr. Yarnal l be granted an extension of time
to remove vehicles. The motion died for lack of a second .
9. Motion by Mr. Mitchell, seconded by Mr. Wallsh that Board recommend
that City Commission grant an extension of time through August 31 1981
to Mr. . i. a i all .
10. Mr. Wallsh stated that the City Comrnis s ion was having a worksession on
September 4 and perhaps they could consider request at that time. Mayor
Hepp was present and stated that a special meeting could be called on
September 4 if that was the desire of the Codes Enforcement Board. Mr.
Julian stated that he did not see the necessity of having a special meeting,
that the next regular meeting would be satisfactory and asked that the
extension be made retroactive.
11. Mr. Thomas said the purpose of the board was to enforce ordinances
and he was opposed to granting any extension or recommending any change
in ordinance. Mr. Pavone said that he agreed with Mr. Thomas.
ID
12. Mr. Rooks said that board could not change any fine; that the Circuit
Court is the proper reviewing authority. Mr. Rooks said this was the first
case and the board was moving carefully to insure that all procedures were
correct.
13. Commissioner Larmann asked if the Codes Enforcement Board was an
advisory board and Mr. Rooks said not as such but that any board, whether
advisory or not , could make recommendations to the Commis s ion .
14. A vote on the motion of Mr. Mitchell that Board recommend to City Cris s ion
that an extens ion be granted was denied by a vote of 4 to 1 with Mr. Mitchell
voting Aye and Mr. Wallsh, Mr. Pavone , Mr. Farrell and Mr. Thomas voting Nay,
15. Mr. wallsh announced that the next meeting of the board would be held
on September 22, 19818
16. Can Lormarn asked about status of current case and Mr. Rooks
stated that a fine of $30.00 per vehicle per day continues to ruin. Commissioner
Lormann said she was concerned about the lack of power of the board and Mr .
Wal l sh said that the board had the power given to it by the Conmi s s ion and the
Statute authorizing Codes Enforcement Board. Mr. Wallsh said the board was
attempting to give everyone an opportunity and move carefully on first case .
17. Mr. Rooks said that the Board was not attempting to pass problem to the
finis sion . Mayor Hepp said he agreed with Mr. Thomas and that any appeal
of the Board should go to the Court not the Commission.
18. Mr. Thomas said there is a tendency in all governments that people may
be influenced in their actions by their need for reelection. Mr. Thomas said
he feels the board is good, can make decision and the board has acc lished
results in 99 cases without necessity for hearings. Mr. Farrell said he agreed.
Mr. Rooks said the Board had learned a lot -- that perhaps at next meeting the
board might consider whether additional purer to grant extensions night be
appropriate in cases of legitimate excuses for non - compliance.
AWk
19. Mr. Mitchell suggested that Mr. Rooks check with the state concerning
appeals and Mr, Rooks said he had the State Statute and that all appeals
were to go to the Circuit Court. Mr. Farrell said he thought that this
case would encourage compliance .
20. The Codes Enforcement Board adjourned at 8:17 p.m.
A'TTES'T
Board Secretary,