CEB_02-24-98_Mine
�-qc qk.
�� �- -
Aa
it I
N ! liv 1,
391
FgZe
F!rt
extension, since he would be out of the country at the tune of this meeting, that he was indeed
op", present. Mr. Boetto stated that he was present because lie thought that his request for an extension
had been denied. Attorney Taylor advised that when there is a request ahead of time, a
continuation is usually granted. A discussion followed and it was agreed by all that since the City
was not prepared, that this matter would be continued to the next regular meeting on March 24,
1998. Mr. Boetto waived his right to receive a written Notice of Hearing. Motion was made and
seconded to continue this matter to the next regular meeting; motion was carried unanimously by
voice vote.
B. C. David & Patricia Ferguson and Karen MacDonald - CEB 98-02 -003
Chairman Bundy called the second case. Ms. Price presented the facts of the case: Mr. and Mrs.
Ferguson are the owners of the property at 1094 North C.R. 427, and Karen MacDonald is the
tenant. In July and October of 1997 Ms. Price contacted Mr. and Mrs. Ferguson regarding the
accumulation of trash and debris and the multitude of outdoor storage in the yard of the subject
property. The appearance of the property improved after that, however, once again
Ms. MacDonald allowed the mess to grow. Complaints were received by her office, as well as
the offices of the City Administrator and the Director of Public Safety. Notice was served on
February 9, 1998, yet the violation continued. Ms. Price advised that she wanted the Board to find
in violation so that if it happens again, it can be addressed under the repeat offender clause, and
that a $100 administrative fee be imposed.
Mr. Ferguson was present and testified that each time lie was notified of a violation, he advised
his tenant to clean up the property, and this last time, he served an eviction notice on her, as well.
He stated that he did not want to be a "slum lord"'.
Ms. MacDonald took the stand and testified that everything had been cleaned up within the
appropriate timeframe.
A discussion ensued about this being an ongoing problem and who should be culpable, tenant or
landlord. Ms. Price stated that both the landlords and the tenant had received notices. Attorney
Ooodblatt advised that the Board had the authority to cite all three parties, if it so chooses.
Ms. Dennis made the motion to find the property owners, Mr. and Mrs. Ferguson, guilty and that
they be fined an administrative fee of $100.00 to be paid within 30 days. Motion was seconded-
by Mr. Lomax, and the motion passed by unanimous roll call vote.
C. Nalili R. Patel dl bt a A Little Shop of Flowers - CEB 98 -02 -004
Ms. Price presented the facts of the case: Nalili Patel is the owner of A Little Shop of Flowers.
In the past two years, during holidays, and most recently on valentine's Day 1998, the owner put
out signs and banners without first obtaining a sign permit. The owners have been cited for this
three or four times in the past two years.
4:��i4L 11�! ��iTLRl: �H ° .aii! ' ►�2,�'�irGPI�LJ.1f►�:7� 1i•'
Ms. Coodblatt questioned why this matter was addressed under Section 5 -19 of the City Code,
o" "doing work without a permit". A discussion ensued concerning the applicability of this section
and the definition of a "structure ". Attorney Taylor advised that the citation be amended to refer
to the appropriate section of the Code. Chairman Bundy asked if it was the City's wish to amend
the Notice, and Ms. Price responded in the affirmative.
Ms. Patel's accountant then took the stand. Chairman Bundy asked if lie understood what had been
discussed, and he responded that he did. He testified that his client, a tenant of this property and
not a landlord, had previously applied for permits on two occasions about two years prior, and had
been refused both times. He said that his client would cooperate and apply for a permit, but she
needed to be advised of the parameters. He said that he knew that the Code was violated on
Valentine's Day; Ms. Price had spoken with Mr. Patel, the owner's husband, but he did not relay
the messages to Mrs. Patel.
A discussion followed about the City denying sign permits. Attorney Taylor stated that about I
to 2 years ago the City was inconsistent about granting sign permits, but that the problem had
improved in the past six months. Mr. Taylor believed that this problem with the City denying
sign permits constituted a mitigating circumstance in this case.
Motion was made by Ms. Dennis to amend the violation from City Code 5 -19 to Land
Development Code 24- 60.03. Motion was seconded and carried by unanimous voice vote.
Further discussion ensued about what fine to impose and whether to invoke the repeat offender
clause. Motion was made and amended by Mr. Maingot that the respondent be found guilty of
0"b, violating Section 24 -60.03 of the Land Development Code and that only an administrative fine of
$25 be assessed and that in the future this violator be treated as a repeat offender. Motion was
seconded by Ms. Dennis, and a roll call vote was unanimous.
6, OLD BUSINESS
Rick W. Harrison - CEB 98- 01-001
Nis. Price testified that Mr. Harrison had been given a permit for electrical work and also intended
to do some sewer repairs, which did not require a permit. The electrical work was inspected and
found to be satisfactory. A brief discussion followed emphasizing that a homeowner is allowed
to work on his own home without a permit.
CEB officer
Ms. Dennis asked how the CEB will be kept abreast of whether or not violators come into
compliance. A discussion ensued and it was agreed that it was at the City's discretion to advise
the CEB of whether or not violators come into compliance. Ms. Price advised the CEB that she
is responsible for all paperwork, since she has no secretary or assistant. Attorney Taylor informed
the Board that he would recommend to the City that a full -time secretary and a full -time CEB
officer be employed. Mr. Maingot suggested, and Ms. Price agreed, that all correspondence and
notices have a date.
C.- 10FRCEV *7 9T
7. NEW BUSINESS
Sobotka
Attorney Taylor testified that a prior CEB lien was litigated successfully for the City, and that the
foreclosure on the property resulted in a $33,916.50 surplus which would not satisfy Longwood 's
lien in full. Attorney Taylor requested that the Board reduce the lien to $33,916.50 to avoid future
litigation and the possibility that the lien will be uncollectibie.
Motion was made by Mr. Maingot and seconded by Ms. Dennis to reduce the lien to $33,916.50
to save the City additional fees for litigation. Motion carried by unanimous voice vote.
7:00 Starting Time
In response to a recommendation by Attorney Taylor to start the CEB meetings at 7 :00 and after
a brief discussion, motion was made by Ms. Dennis and seconded by Mr. Maingot to start all
future CEB meetings at 7:00 p.m. Roll call vote was unanimous.
8. ADJOURNMENT
The Code Enforcement Board Meeting adjourned at 9:00 p.m.
Respectfully submitted,
Carol D. Hoben
Recording Secretary